U6D2-28 - Explore, Examine and Identify Hybrid Action Learning Data Tools (Model). ***PLEASE FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AS OUTLINED BELOW*** See Attached Documents for Reference and Readings.

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 1/13

D

9 Research and Utilization

iscussion questions at the end of Chapters 1–8 have been used to spur thoughts and ideas. The hybrid framework is a concept under construction, yet to be fully tested. It may never be employed in its entirety, but be adapted only in pieces as they fit situations. It is proposed as a way to assist

communities and organizations in moving forward. With that in mind, considerations for research and utilization will be examined in Chapter 9.

For research, the hybrid is given in Table 9.1 as are questions about it. The columns include, with one exception, steps, concerns about them, areas to be explored, and additional observations. The exception is that the first row deals with the overall framework. Is it sensible, what about philosophical underpinnings, and so forth? What could be done to learn more about it? Then the row-by-row entries are reviewed in some depth. It is hoped that this will stimulate inquiry, development, refinement, and improvement of the framework.

THE OVERALL FRAMEWORK (TABLE 9.1, ROW 1)

The premise of the framework is that two oppositional positions can be blended together, eventually leading to programs and projects for change and development of organizations and communities. Is that reasonable? Judging by the cases in Chapters 7 and 8, the answer is yes, for it was implemented without many problems, but the response may be too superficial and quick.

In almost all instances, the investigators stated that they were aware of the assets and needs philosophies and considered both important. They were more enthusiastic about the positive dimensions of resources with needs playing a part (a lesser one) in the drama. They did not want to emphasize a deficit approach even though it was going to be looked at and tied to assets. Needs were there, but assets and strengths were more pronounced. While this isn’t an equal balance, it isn’t negative, and as stressed in the first chapters, if you cannot achieve that stance, it is better to begin with assets.

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 2/13

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 3/13

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 4/13

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 5/13

Another observation is that this book was published somewhat after all of the located studies were completed. Therefore, they would not be expected to fit totally with the substance of a proposed framework. A more serious consideration is whether the two approaches can be included in one investigation without compromising basic tenets. Can an involved group (community members, staff from an organization, facilitators) be open to needs and assets and resources at the same time? That could be studied empirically. If access to a project could be gained as it was starting, involved individuals might be interviewed about their perceptions. Do they think that needs assessment and the identification of assets and resources are in opposition? Does it really matter or affect learning about their environment? As noted before, when beginning with assets, needs are there—a perception of discrepancy exists. It simply can’t be avoided. Here is where we are now, and here is where we want to be or should be.

Other concerns about the overall framework are that it might be upsetting to those with strong needs assessment or asset orientations, that it may be better for some specialized areas, and how it came into existence. Taking these in order, the author was a strong adherent of needs assessment before diving into the literature. He still holds many of those values, but his views have broadened, and in a hybrid study it is important to heed the positive message coming from assets. Needs are deficits, and a heavy focus on them can be negative, affecting enthusiasm and motivation. Seeing things that way may not work well. It must be tempered by a “what do we have/what can we do/what are our strengths/what is under our control/what can we undertake,” not “what do we expect others to do for us,” type of attitude. Acting this way should be embraced and enhance motivation and enthusiasm for progress.

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 6/13

As for the field, the framework may be more apropos for some. Health and related areas appear frequently with regard to blends of methods and approaches. In health, part of one’s training is epidemiology, which has elements of needs assessment, database studies looking at deficiencies. In several of the Chapter 7 cases, this is exactly what was implemented along with coming at issues from an assets base. Professionals with such training are attuned to using needs data and almost naturally gravitate toward linking such data to assets. Epidemiology also has a qualitative dimension for determining where a disease comes from and uses both types of data. In seeking causality, researchers go to the field to observe and conduct interviews. It is a natural combination of procedures, and the hybrid is right in line with that stance.

As for how the framework or structure originated, it was synthesized from the literature as a guess of how two distinct camps could be blended together. Admittedly, the synthesizer is into needs assessment, but that is now attenuated and muted with needs assessment and asset/capacity building housed in one structure. What resulted is a hybrid for examining what others have done to see if it would be reasonable. It was an ideal played out against the real world. It was never assumed that all of its eight steps could or should be implemented. Could communities and organizations actually put the whole shebang into operation or think about doing that with the activities and costs that might be required? Rather, here is a scaffolding in order to choose what has the most benefit and relevance for the local context and issues of concern. Conversely, without the framework, the process would be more haphazard.

Research would provide in-depth understandings about how to work across philosophies and methods and push the art of what we do forward via the findings of meaningful studies. Qualitative ones (interviews, document reviews, focus group interviews) immediately come to mind, complemented by surveys. Experimental studies are not too likely, but ex post facto (causal comparative) research would apply.

One last point is that since research will be highly dependent on records and documentation, it is imperative that local groups keep them when investigating their settings. If a committee is small and grassroots, it is much to assume that this will always be done. Still, groups should be encouraged to do so. For formal endeavors with external funding and professional staff, the likelihood of records increases. External funding usually requires that written reports be supplied to the sponsors.

In all instances, a good idea is that records and products be dated to keep track of what transpired. The dates help to show how ideas and discussions evolved and what outcomes were realized at what times. If there are summary tables (like Table 3.3), they will demonstrate what the group did, the kinds of information and sources tapped into, and what was produced. Documentation is an audit trail from inception to completion. It is invaluable for evaluation, going from Step 8 to Step 1, and for later groups to review when they use the hybrid framework.

STEP 1. SCOPING THE CONTEXT (TABLE 9.1, ROW 2)

There are many things to think about here. How do these enterprises begin, and how are they sustained? Do they come from an assets base or from needs (even if just a sense of needs)? Is there a guiding vision, and whose is it? What is the nature of those involved? What was done? What kinds of information gathering were undertaken? Did they get off on the right foot? How did they keep making progress? If they failed, what contributed to that outcome? How do internal and external actors work together? Is a one-sided relationship present? Is it internally led or externally directed? Have partnerships been created with mutual trust and shared input? A few of these questions will be discussed.

What Is the Impetus for Hybrid Work? Impetus relates to a nebulous yet important concept called “vision.” The coach (Nick Saban) of what is

recognized as the most successful college football program in the country was interviewed and stated that

you’ve got to have a vision . . . you’ve got to have a plan to implement it. Then you’ve got to set the example . . . , develop the principles and values that are important, and get people to buy into it. (O’Keefe, 2012)

This is how the improvement or development might begin. What is vision? Is it a need (a deficit, a deficiency)? Is it seeing assets and possibilities? Is it both? It is difficult to define, but it is a necessary je ne sais quoi condition for getting going (see Exhibit 9.1).

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 7/13

Exhibit 9.1 A Real-Life Example of Vision

Recently my wife and I were visiting our youngest son who lives in a major western U.S. city. He is minor partner in a just-opened neighborhood bar and grill business. We saw it and were impressed with the ambience that he and his partners created and with the fact that in just over four months it was doing well in patronage and becoming recognized in the locality. When we were at the establishment, we met one of the major partners, its guiding light. He has kept meticulous records.

He showed me a photographic, chronological catalog of what it originally looked like so that I could see what it was now and how far it had come. The difference was striking and a testament to his vision and the sweat equity invested by the partners. To put it bluntly, if putting capital into the original property was based on what was there, the author would not have offered any funds—the need was too large. The place was run-down (seedy) and required much refurbishing and renewal. I’m a needs assessor, not an asset/capacity builder. So what did he see?

He is both a visionary and a realistic person coming from a business program in a local university. He had been a successful marketer for a chain of similar establishments and wanted to branch out on his own. He saw what it would take to bring the building to a level where it would be a functioning, viable enterprise. The need was apparent, and he was cognizant of it as discerned from our conversation.

But a stronger factor was a view of “what could be,” a usual part of needs assessment but one subsumed in a vision. It was an opportunity and something that I feel most others, particularly I, would not have seen. It consisted of location and visibility (on a main street), parking along the side of the building, room for two outdoor patios and activities for use when weather permitted, and some indications of how the inside of the building might be reconfigured so that a local neighborhood bar might be transformed into a meeting and fun place. There are numerous rooms, so if one wants to mingle with other patrons, it is easy to do.

It is now a reality, not a vision. Yes, there was a discrepancy (a deficit) that was tempered by a vision. Is this needs, assets, or a natural merging of the two? The last part of the sentence is an accurate depiction of the process.

One researchable aspect of the hybrid is how it begins. Who are the key players, and how do they perceive the local context? What brought them to the table, and what knowledge and understanding do they bring to the discourse? What do they consider, and what do they not know that they would like to find out? If we could understand these features, they would represent a kind of learning that would be transportable to similar circumstances.

Internal Versus External: Which One? In the perfect world, an internal group would coalesce around a desire to improve or change in some way.

The members of this group would become the hub around which initial activities occur. They make the key decisions about directions. They specify questions to ask and the information sources to be looked at, collect data, interpret what was obtained, and determine how what they found could be utilized. This is the core working group, which would tend to be small in number at the start and expand later as the steps in the framework unfold and are achieved.

External involvement is quite different from above. It is not to make decisions, although advice and guidance from consultants and others is acceptable so long as it does not usurp local decision making. In terms of the framework, decisions are the province of the bottom-up constituency and are not top down or directed by outsiders.

In the cases in Chapters 7 and 8, that did not take place. In the health examples, the investigations were outsider led, but the voice of the community was notably there. There was a partnership on this internal- external continuum between outsiders conducting the study and those who provided information, often interpreted data, and helped to make decisions. This represents a departure from traditional needs assessment and is halfway toward the empowerment philosophy of asset/capacity building. How to characterize what is seen in practice? We could see situations where heavy external control could go to the point of being resented by internal, local constituents. Like in Figure 9.1, it is a tug of war between the sides.

In Figure 9.2, a balanced relationship between external and internal participants is occurring. It isn’t a competitive turf war; instead, they see each other as contributors to possible ways to improve. Each group

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 8/13

values the other one. What does this say in regard to bottom-up initiation and decision making? It is something to aspire to—

self-determination is a pillar of our society and ethos. This may take place, and it is good when it does. Actual practice may not work like this. The demands of collecting and analyzing data, as well as the necessity of organizing to do so and eventually to take action, suggest that an alternative stance is what happens. An external group has leadership in hybrid work, but community constituencies and/or organization staff are involved. Usually the external consultants and facilitators are funded for data collection, the design of procedures and instruments, analysis, interpretation, and the generation of reports. The community or staff members are not, so this is a way to proceed and ensure that the project is completed.

Figure 9.1 The External-Internal Tug of War

Source: Thinkstock/Digital Vision

Figure 9.2 The External-Internal Positive Collaboration

Source: Can Stock Photo Inc. / 4774344sean

But it should be approached from an asset perspective. In a number of the studies in the prior two chapters, the people from whom data and information were obtained were not targets or subjects (a negative

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 9/13

connotation if there ever was one); rather, they are integral to the hybrid framework. Their roles go way beyond just providing data. They are collaborators in the best sense of the word. This requires careful planning on how to get the community to buy into the process with decisions based on input from all involved parties. What an area for research!

How well does this work? What factors impede, and what factors facilitate? Have people been questioned about how decision making was handled and if their voices were heard? How much extra time does it take to foster interactions that include everyone? What are the drawbacks to doing this—can efforts require too much time with the subsequent loss of enthusiasm and motivation? Much should be done to expand knowledge in this area.

What Does Scoping Require in Terms of Information? We live in a world with almost instantaneous access to information. To “Google” is now a verb. With that understanding, what does the initiating group require in terms of data to have a feel for assets

and needs? The answer varies. Some issues are complex and demand much information; others are straightforward, so less will be sought. Doing retrospective surveys would provide keen insights. Respondents would reflect on when the project started, what kinds of information were available, what was most useful, what influenced decisions, what was not useful, and why. Data could be collected across an array of efforts of small and wide scope and of short- and long-term duration. Reports could be scrutinized for what was actually obtained and when. If dated tables and summaries were kept, they would be a treasure trove of what happened. Data sources could be sorted into classes in accord with different situations and settings. Descriptive results would be invaluable for groups deciding to start a hybrid process.

Finally, from the cases in Chapters 7 and 8, only a small set of methods were employed for Step 1, and they were implemented one time or once in a while with some follow-up. Surveys, individual interviews, focus group interviews, analyses of existing databases or reports emanating from same, observations, and identifying assets and resources were noted. Other methods were not so prominent. Combinations of these techniques seemed to afford sufficient depth for local investigations, and doing more would have been a waste of precious resources.

STEP 2. DECIDING WHAT ACTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN (TABLE 9.1, ROW 3)

Decisions for action occur earlier in the literature than later as in the hybrid framework. Since most of the located studies were highly focused, supported by external funds from concerned organizations, and often carried out by consultants, the full framework may be too much. How do groups make their decisions, what information do they attend to, and how do they synthesize qualitative and quantitative data into meaningful understandings? How do they transform what has been learned into strategies for action and improvement? What are the procedures that guide deliberations? (See techniques for research suggested earlier.)

One interesting facet of the cases was who participated in the decision process. Those studied and for whom programs and projects would be developed were not bystanders to what was being considered. They were part of assigning meaning to collected data and were included meaningfully in the discussion of new directions. By survey or interview, it would be interesting to probe how the deliberations went. For facilitators, how well did discussions proceed, to what degree were all players involved, what were the issues that came up, what concerns were voiced, what problems were encountered, how were they resolved, how efficient was the process, what were the advantages and disadvantages of involving many in decision making, if they had to do this over what should be changed, and so forth? When decisions are made, what sort of follow-up should there be with participants?

For participants, how well did the discussion go, did they feel all parties were equally valued for input, did they feel welcomed at the session, did decisions reflect everyone’s ideas, were reasonable choices made, how would they rate the quality of this part of their involvement, and so forth? What sort of continued involvement would be good for the community or organization? Who (what groups or individuals) should be responsible for new initiatives? Do they have any misgivings about what might happen in the future?

Since most of the cases were pursuing decision making this way, it would be a fruitful avenue for research into the heartbeat of the needs assessment and asset/capacity-building endeavor. It could demonstrate how to foster collaborative partnerships that enhance community or organizational endeavors for betterment.

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 10/13

STEPS 3–5. THE NEXT SEVERAL STEPS (TABLE 9.1, ROWS 4–6)

Step 3. Dividing the working committee into two subcommittees

Step 4. Conducting the assessment in greater depth

Step 5. Using what has been learned to make decisions for possible new programs

From what was reviewed, not much of these activities were done. That may be due to the restrictions that journals put on manuscript length or the resources that the local investigations could devote to documenting and reporting all activities. Only so much can be summarized given time constraints and the purpose for which reports are used and audiences for them. Whatever the reasons, it is assumed that the steps may only be part of a long effort for large organizations or a sizable entity (city, community). The rejuvenation of German Village is an example in contrast to the shorter one from Bali in Chapter 7. Doing all steps would take a lot of funding and personnel.

To study such activities would entail identifying large, ongoing project entities and obtaining their records; still, it could be difficult to discern the steps. They may be there in pieces or embedded in prior or subsequent events or not labeled. They may have occurred but be buried in older files. On the other hand, if researchers independently reviewing records came up with similar findings, it would tend to verify the framework’s utility.

Another way to collect data could be from interviews of those who had been involved over time or quite a ways back. If they are of the latter condition, they might not recall, might inaccurately recall, or might attune their memories to mesh with current perceptions, resulting in conclusions that are less accurate, yet their perspectives would offer insights into what happened. If the time period is very long, there are worries about mortality as a source of invalidity as some may have moved, may no longer be accessible, or may have passed away. Researchers are always advised to corroborate findings from such interviews via archived sources.

STEP 6. DEVELOPING A STRATEGY FOR IMPROVEMENT (TABLE 9.1, ROW 7)

It was gratifying to find case studies of hybrids that led to positive changes in the local situation. If this doesn’t occur, why do this work? It takes energy and determination to carry it out, and patience is needed. In most of the cases, plans or strategies were developed and results achieved. It is not clear that all outcomes can be attributed to the hybrid framework. In one situation, what was learned helped local areas to compete and successfully get additional funds. In another, it began a mechanism for much more visible local involvement. Ultimately, the test of the framework is whether it produces results that might not be realized without its implementation. That implies a controlled experiment with a manipulated variable, which strains credibility. What is more likely is that plans would be obtained and examined in light of knowledge emanating from the local investigation. Then questions such as the following could be asked:

• What specifically was found about assets and needs? • Is there evidence that it led to the strategy for improvement and change? • Is the purpose of the plan directly related to the needs or problems identified? • Is the voice of the community or organization staff prominent in the plans, and is it recognizable and

notable? • Does what has been planned link to what was learned, and does it grow from that base? • Does it concretely take advantage of the identified assets and resources? • Is the fabric of the community or organization strengthened by building bridges across groups and

services? • Does the plan include timelines and responsibilities for getting things accomplished? • What is the nature of the leadership for the plan, and how do the leaders relate to the key partnering

groups and actors and players within them? • Are there enough resources to get the job done? • Is there a slow incremental start followed by gradual expansion?

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 11/13

• If growth is considered, what will it take to ramp up to a larger scale? • Is the community a solid, not a superficial, part of the project or program? • Is collaboration across groups in the environment evident? • Are there provisions for evaluation that include formatively monitoring activities and collecting data

about outcomes? • Do the evaluation data contain indicators from constituencies regarding what they think the project

might produce? • Overall, is the plan feasible, and will it function as designed? • What are its weakest points? • Do we sense where it might fail, and what we should pay special attention to? • Has any causal analysis been undertaken so that focus can be directed toward possible failure spots?

Once the researchers selected questions, they would rate what communities and organizations had done along with any comments made about the plans. These could be collated across projects to see if patterns emerged. What are the characteristics of large-scale, long-term proposed efforts? Do they resemble or differ from smaller ones? What aspects of plans do not seem to be there? Do plans have evaluation activities that will help promote an understanding of their operations and how they might or might not be contributing to success?

Such information would be important to know, for almost everyone at some time has been part of a collective process to do something new. Some of these have gone well, and when they do not, it is a turnoff, making it more difficult to engage in such activities again. What happened that reduced effectiveness? Undoubtedly, some of this may be due to personalities, and there may not be much that could be done about that. Or we haven’t taken into account contingencies, places where what should happen simply doesn’t happen. Translating assets and needs into a change that empowers and energizes a group is a particularly good thing to do. Investigating what others have done should pay high dividends in that regard in the future.

STEPS 7 AND 8. THE LAST ONES (TABLE 9.1, ROWS 8 AND 9)

Step 7. Implementing and evaluating the action plan

Step 8. Recycling back to first steps for expanding the improvement package

Underlying these steps is the concept of sustainability. How well has our improvement strategy worked? What can evaluation data tell us? Who benefited, and in what ways did they grow or change? Will the effort still be there after the initial use? Were unintended positive or negative results noted? Will the effort continue, who will fund it, and who will be the implementers? What improvements should be made? How can we leverage off of it, and what should the expanded program look like?

Has a foundation been established for going from our initial platform to an extended one? Is the community or organization now a learning organism that adapts to its context and changes happening around it?

Have we gone back to our beginning considerations of needs and assets? What has not been attended to, and why? The original fact-finding was done earlier—does it still apply to current conditions, or is the information too old? We uncovered a lot of resources and assets before—how can we capitalize on them? Could we leverage what was found earlier? How should we organize to keep up momentum? Are we in a position to secure other resources for doing more of the job? If our new project has been successful, how can we get the word out about it? Should the initiating group be expanded to help us proceed into the future?

Here is where we should look at contexts in which there is a long history of using needs and assets to change directions. What would be necessary to continue the hybrid framework beyond the current point? Here it might again be useful to interview those who have been involved over a lengthy period of time.

What was it like in the early days, and how has the group evolved?

What were the major events—things that set the tone for keeping things in motion?

What were successes, and what were the failures or less-than-stellar outcomes?

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 12/13

What records were kept, and what can be gleaned from them?

In terms of personalities, who were the driving forces?

Reflecting on what happened, what major events or points in the life of the collective were the high points, and why?

What were the low points, and were there moments when continuation was questionable?

What is generated would be a historical record. History is important since it informs the future. It also provides perspective and proportion. If the archives and files are available, they can be displayed in the community or organization in prominent locations. Assuredly, they will attract attention.

The author lives in a large city that is celebrating its 200th birthday. The local newspaper has run photo essays showing what was and what is now. These are fascinating to see and help us to think about what might lie ahead.

RESEARCH ACROSS ALL STEPS—ABOUT METHODS (THE WHOLE TABLE)

Research is done to describe phenomena, test propositions, seek causality, and develop new understandings. Methods are descriptive, relational, and for causality experimental. Even though experimentation could be embedded in some procedures, for the most part manipulating variables in the hybrid context is debatable. Surveys, interviews, and analysis of records and documentation would mainly be employed, and causal comparative studies would be seen much more than experimental ones. Thus assigning causality to variables is difficult, and subjective judgment would be in play. We cannot say that this variable or that one was a critical factor in success or failure. This viewpoint is too restrictive, for when multiple cases are studied, much can be learned.

If independent reviews came to the same conclusions, it would be suggestive of how collective activities function. This follows a canon of proof proposed by John Stuart Mill; that is, if you see events and the same pattern or sequence is there across them, then they are connected through some aspect of causality. Replication partially compensates for lack of experimental control. Support for research into uses of the hybrid framework should be sought—from the author’s point of view it would pay off.

UTILIZATION, A RECURRING AND SUBTLE THEME

Throughout, utilization of hybrid results is woven into the fabric of the text. Does the process lead to betterment for people, communities, and organizations? Is there a direct link to action? That is one understanding of the term, and in many of the cases there is direct evidence that this occurred. In Philadelphia, Scotland, Houston, and others, improvements were being made, and the lives of people were being affected. We want to see this, and without it, it would be difficult to support the hybrid framework. We might conclude that it was a good idea in theory but in practice it did not amount to much that was worthwhile. It is rewarding that results were realized, but the above connotation of utilization is insufficient, too narrow, too confined.

What was observed was more in the way of one-time changes or short-term ones, even if the specific programs and efforts continued over time. A broader meaning was noted in the Scottish papers where resilient communities were described. They were ones who learned to cope with adversity and could bounce back from it and keep perspective. This point was buttressed by the case in the United Kingdom where some communities seemed to have a leg up in being experienced and organized to deal with troubling situations.

There is a kind of subtle community or organizational learning that plays a critical role in progress. It is a sine qua non that has to be there or be capable of being developed for optimum implementation of the hybrid approach. If it isn’t, the process just doesn’t come off well, and less-than-stellar results are obtained.

Indeed, in one of the cases the investigators expressed dismay that they did not leave in place a strong enough infrastructure for the community to continue and expand upon what was begun.

This is an alternative way to think about utilization. Have the communities and groups grown in how they plan and contemplate moving forward now that they have investigated assets and needs? Are they different in this regard? Have they matured in the manner in which they capitalize on strengths and apply them to gaps or to new, unanticipated ventures? Will this mind-set generalize to future efforts? This is more difficult to measure, yet seems to be of greater importance than the outcome at the beginning of this section. There are

4/20/2018 Bookshelf Online: Bridging the Gap Between Asset/Capacity Building and Needs Assessment: Concepts and Practical Applic

https://online.vitalsource.com/#/books/9781483321745/cfi/6/40!/4/2/4@0:0 13/13

almost covert indications in some of the cases that this is really what needs to take place. Success is to be judged not just in the short run but later as the group moves to new endeavors and should be a focus for research. A gestalt has been established in the collective, and it has been enabled to deal with problems and become adaptive. It has a mechanism (the hybrid) for building better communities and organizations. That is the ultimate goal and the one for which we should strive.

HIGHLIGHTS OF CHAPTER 9

1. The chapter began by noting that questions have been embedded in the text, with many related to research that could be conducted on the hybrid framework.

2. Table 9.1 was offered to raise issues about the framework and its steps. It contained some methods that could be used to study hybrid usage and comments about the potential value of findings that might be produced.

3. Each table entry was discussed with ideas as to studies that might be conducted. These were teasers to pique the interest of others, and to foster a conversation about learning more about the hybrid.

4. A few comments were made about methods for conducting studies. 5. The chapter closed with a note about utilization.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

Since the goal is to foster probing the hybrid framework, it would be redundant to pose any more questions except for the following point. The hybrid is a formulation, an educated guess of what might take place when doing a combined approach. It is hoped that the framework will engender more examples of its use, which in turn will inform and improve practice. If the text has sparked further interest in a restructured or different schema, that would be a most positive result. The reader is encouraged to think about alternatives and then to push understandings further along.

Please join in the journey!