> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://urd.gitbook.io/compass/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://urd.gitbook.io/compass/learning-and-adapting/practising-adaptive-management/adaptive-management-in-practice-design-and-launch-phases.md). # Adaptive Management in practice — Design and Launch phases #### Design and Launch phases The design and launch phases are where the foundations of an adaptive intervention are laid. This is where the most important decisions are made — about objectives, partnerships, governance, and monitoring systems — and where the most common mistakes are made. This page walks through four key moments in the design and launch phases, drawing on the main objectives of these phases: * **Mobilising stakeholders and resources;** * **Identifying the purpose;** * **Planning with flexibility;** * **Structuring for agile governance**. *** ### **Mobilise — building the right conditions from the start** Adaptive management starts before the first activity. The way a team is constituted, the way partners are brought on board, and the way communities are engaged from day one all shape how much adaptive flexibility the intervention will actually have. **Recruit for agility, not just for technical skills.** In complex contexts, the personal qualities of staff matter as much as their technical expertise. Recruiting locally is not just an ethical choice — local staff have contextual knowledge and relationship networks that are essential for early warning and rapid adaptation. When recruiting, pay attention to attitudes: curiosity, comfort with uncertainty, willingness to question one's own assumptions, ability to unlearn, critical thinking, willingness to explore new opportunities versus relyong on tried-and-tested methods, and communication skills are better predictors of adaptive performance than technical qualifications alone. > It is much harder to force yourself to unlearn something you thought worked than it is to learn something new. Yet this is the foundation of adaptive management: questioning the question and being willing to change—not just your actions, but your underlying principles and assumptions. > > Watch this video to discover an inspiring experience in unlearning, and explore how **Knowledge** differs from **Understanding**: {% embed url="" %} **Build interdependence into the team from the start.** An adaptive team is not a collection of individuals each managing their own component. It is a group that shares information, makes decisions collectively, and covers for each other when the situation changes. This interdependence does not happen automatically. It needs to be built deliberately, through team processes that create shared understanding of the purpose, the context, and each other's roles and constraints. > *Definition of agile staff : individuals, regardless of their job title, who, in collaboration with the relevant stakeholders, systematically acquire and apply knowledge to make decisions and adjustments as part of their work in order to achieve greater impact.*
**Engage communities and local partners as co-designers, not as consultants.** Consultation at the start of a project is not participation. Genuine co-design means involving communities and local partners in defining the problem, identifying possible responses, and setting the criteria for success, before the strategy is fixed. This takes more time at the start. It saves far more time later, because the intervention starts from a more accurate understanding of reality. {% content-ref url="/pages/WpXsXN4qzCWjadrlm431" %} [Equitable partnerships: a way to foster adaptability?](/compass/learning-and-adapting/practising-adaptive-management/equitable-partnerships-a-way-to-foster-adaptability.md) {% endcontent-ref %} *** ### **Identify — clarifying the purpose and keeping the compass** In complex situations, activities and approaches will change. What should not change, at least not without very deliberate reflection, is the long term vision or the purpose: the fundamental change the intervention is trying to contribute to, and why it matters. **Define the purpose clearly and keep it visible.** The "purpose" in adaptive management is not the same as a logical framework objective. It is a shared answer to the question: *what would genuinely better look like for the communities we are working with, and how will we know if we are getting there?* This purpose needs to be defined with communities and partners, not for them, and it needs to be simple enough to be used as a reference point throughout implementation. This is the starting point for developing an adaptive approach and a robust intervention strategy. **Map the key actors and dynamics.** Adaptive management requires a good understanding of the system the intervention is operating in. It is not just about the needs of target communities, but it is essential to understand the interests, capacities and relationships of the actors who shape the context. Tools like stakeholder mapping can help visualise these dynamics and identify where the most important pressure points and opportunities lie. {% file src="/files/GB1QWngajdMNTsmXK2EQ" %} **Use a theory of change as a living document.** A theory of change in an adaptive intervention is not a diagram produced during design and then filed. It is a working hypothesis, a statement of what the team currently believes will lead to the desired change, and why. It should be reviewed regularly during implementation and updated when evidence suggests the assumptions were wrong. *** ### **Plan — planning for change, not just for delivery** The single biggest barrier to adaptive management is a plan that was never designed to be adapted. Over-detailed activity plans, rigid logical frameworks, and inflexible budgets all signal to implementing teams that the plan is what matters — not the results. **Plan progressively, not exhaustively.** Rather than specifying every activity for the full duration of the project at the outset, adaptive planning defines the near term in detail(generally called milestones) and the medium- and longer-term in outline, with explicit review points at which the plan will be updated based on what has been learned. This is sometimes called a "roadmap" approach: the destination is clear, the route is adjusted as you go. **Use the USAID CLA framework as a planning reference.** The Collaborating, Learning and Adapting (CLA) framework from USAID organises adaptive planning around three phases that align well with the COMPASS project cycle: * **Framing** — clarifying the purpose, the key assumptions, and the conditions under which adaptation would be triggered. This is the design-phase equivalent of asking: *under what circumstances would we change our approach, and how would we know?* * **Planning and sentinel indicators** — identifying the specific signals that will be monitored to detect when adaptation is needed, and building them into the monitoring plan. Not all indicators are equal: sentinel indicators are the ones that tell you something important is changing before it becomes a crisis. * **Monitoring and adaptation** — the ongoing cycle of observation, analysis and adjustment during implementation. [Adaptive Management in Practice — Implementation and Monitoring phases](/compass/learning-and-adapting/practising-adaptive-management/adaptive-management-in-practice-implementation-and-monitoring-phases.md) {% file src="/files/q1nch9pxTKWccEUEN51B" %} **Plan for multiple scenarios.** In volatile contexts, a single plan is a fragile plan. Scenario planning, which means developing contingency approaches for different possible context evolutions, allows teams to adapt quickly when the situation changes, because they have already thought through the implications. It is not about predicting the future but about being prepared to act without starting from scratch every time. {% file src="/files/9407lz8KzMVXniDbCz67" %} {% file src="/files/3RDjmup44YxMB7AmHTyP" %} {% file src="/files/iNXyszjcPP2UcfjtNPBL" %} {% file src="/files/JEDGjj3GB2ZpeE0gcHwr" %} **Negotiate flexibility with donors early.** Flexibility is much easier to obtain at the design stage than during implementation. Key elements to negotiate include: the ability to reallocate budget between lines without prior approval up to a defined threshold; a start-up period during which objectives and indicators can be refined; the inclusion of a crisis modifier allowing emergency reallocation without amending the grant agreement; and monitoring frameworks focused on contribution to change rather than attribution of results. *** ### **Structure — governance and decision-making for agility** Adaptive management requires faster and more decentralised decision-making than traditional project management. This does not mean less governance but rather *different* governance, designed explicitly to support adaptation. **Define decision-making levels explicitly.** One of the most common sources of delay in adaptive projects is ambiguity about who can decide what, at which level, without seeking prior approval. A simple decision matrix clarifying what the field team can decide autonomously, what requires programme manager validation, and what requires senior leadership or donor approval removes this ambiguity and enables faster response. Three levels are typically relevant: * **Tactical decisions** — adjustments to how activities are implemented, within the agreed approach (field team authority) * **Programmatic decisions** — changes to what is being done or how resources are allocated, within the agreed strategy (programme manager authority) * **Strategic decisions** — changes to the overall approach or purpose of the intervention (senior leadership and/or donor involvement) **Apply the principle of subsidiarity.** Decisions should be made as close as possible to where the intervention is happening, by the people with the best understanding of what is changing on the ground. This is both a principle of good governance and a practical requirement for adaptive management: by the time a decision has travelled up a hierarchy and back down again, the window for effective action may have closed. By decentralizing decision-making processes, you will not only become more adaptable, but you will also strengthen overall ownership of decisions and, eventually, of the project. **Establish a light but regular steering mechanism.** An adaptive project needs a steering mechanism, a regular moment when the team steps back from daily implementation to ask: are we still on track? Do we need to adjust? This does not need to be a formal steering committee. It can be a short weekly or bi-weekly team meeting with a consistent agenda focused on: what are we observing, what does it mean, what do we need to decide? This can be based, in particular, on the use of informal information [Adaptive Management in Practice — Implementation and Monitoring phases](/compass/learning-and-adapting/practising-adaptive-management/adaptive-management-in-practice-implementation-and-monitoring-phases.md#measure-monitoring-for-decisions-not-for-reports) *** ### **Key points** * The design and launch phases are where adaptive capacity is built or foreclosed — over-planning at this stage makes adaptation harder, not easier * Clarifying the purpose — the fundamental change being pursued — is the most important anchor for an adaptive intervention, more important than a detailed activity plan * Planning progressively, using scenario planning, and negotiating flexibility with donors are the three most important planning choices for enabling adaptation * Decision-making authority needs to be defined explicitly, with the principle of subsidiarity guiding what is delegated to field level * A project charter that formalises the team's way of working is a simple but underused tool for building the internal conditions for adaptation ### **Links and toolbox** {% content-ref url="/spaces/8VQvJtfuTFNUeSv1dIbV/pages/r0ZYgBncaIZwoiOnEFjd" %} [Adaptive management](/compass/documentation/adaptive-management.md) {% endcontent-ref %}