Best perspectives and methods in communicating with

communities. Useful tools for social and development actors.

Author: Arrey Mbongaya Ivo

Date: 01/9/2008

African Centre for Community and Development

P.O.Box 181, Limbe, Cameroon.
46 Ascot Parade, BD7 4NJ, Bradford, UK

Website: www.africancentreforcommunity.com

Emails: ivo@africancentreforcommunity.com

oldboyarret@yahoo.com

©2007 African Centre for Community and Development. All

rights reserved.
Summary: This article highlights best principles and practices when training field

workers and other developments actors in communicating with communities. It

explores various ways of communication, various socio-cultural factors to consider

while communicating and advocates for participation of community stakeholders as

a necessary ingredient for holistic and effective communication.

Communication today is increasingly becoming complex. Communicators and

development workers face growing numbers of fragile states and communities making

ancient categories of society very wanting. Sub-populations are mediated in some cases

by vertical and horizontal inequalities, cultural and modern underpinnings as well as

extremely divergent ideas as to the causes or solutions to communal problems. These

discrepancies have heightened the need to include various stakeholders in society in order

to arrive at effective and inclusive communication platforms between development actors

and the communities they seek to inform, educate or learn with. They have also

questioned classical methods of communication as top-down by reiterating the fact that

there are different perspectives to almost every scientific rule including happiness and

poverty. Therefore the best perspectives and principles to modern communication must

consider communication as a fluid and flexible device that must adapt to peoples,

environments, learning spaces etc. Despite this fluidity however, it must seek to reiterate

the need to blend scientific tools and technologies with cosmic view points or political

ideologies in order to impact on communities concerned or to impact on other

communities where such communication practices will be replicated. In this paper we

have considered the following issues as paramount in imparting information and in

achieving effective transformative and sustainable communication with communities:

• The imperative for social workers to conduct a thorough investigation on the

cultural, historical and economic contexts of the communities they seek to engage

in communication. Pre-feasibility studies and academic research may therefore be

primary entry points in communicating in these communities.

• Investigation mentioned above is tied to the need for detail understanding of the

historical and contemporary dynamics and structures within a community. This

calls for a thorough understanding of whether a given community is homogeneous

or heterogeneous. Heterogeneous societies tend to be more complex entities while

homogeneous societies tend to be simple especially those with one main

language. Understanding enhances the design of more targeted interventions as it

is based on informed data and sound knowledge of the terrain.

• The necessity to identify or map out marginalities in communities. This calls for

research as to whether particular communities are victims of urban or rural

marginalities. Worthy of note is the fact that marginalities create various sub-

groups within particular communities hence identifying each category creates

better access to information for the development or social worker hence better

capacity to react to popular or even specific needs.

• The need to identify the linguistic inclinations and cultural perspectives of the

objectives and goal for communicating with particular communities. Language

may distort scientific fact just like scientific fact may distort language hence it is

necessary for development workers to know what their objectives mean to

 communities or how best to communicate their initiatives to communities. This

point reinforces the above listed points because it argues for better understanding

of etymology of best words to communicate or to enhance partnerships with

communities. This point too may be the reason why participant observation has

been advocated by many development actors.

• The need to understand the roles of households or families in the socio-economic

and political governance of communities.

• The necessity to communicate with authorities within communities and also to go

beyond the biases of authority. This entails respecting authority without accepting

explanations from authority as unfettered or absolute truths. Respecting authority

entails that the social worker or development agent must be capable of separating

stakeholders in power and stakeholders in authority. The latter are constituted and

have generally popular mandates while the former hold communities in hostage

by their affluence, their propensity to brutalise hence remembered fear or even

trickery.

• Understanding the suspicions of the poor towards political authority. Many poor

people live in destitution and have not benefited from government resources

especially in underdeveloped countries. This has caused them to regard social

workers or communicators from or in proximity with governments as part of the

same machinery which is oblivious of their plights. Understanding entails that

development actors must pre-empt via strategies ways of making distrustful sub-

populations see other possibilities of working with groups they do not like without

challenging the premises of their suspicion.

 • The need to defeat the imagery of drama and ritual. Communities tell their

realities in the best ways suited with them. In oral traditions for instance, the

figures of hyperbolism, metaphors and similes can heighten or reduce the impact

of certain social issues hence there is a need to listen and analyse information

from communities before concluding on them. It is imperative to understand what

words and actions mean in the contexts concerned so as not to interpret wrongly

or to communicate derisively. Communicating derisively can mitigate communal

participation and prolong the process of acquiring data as it may become

burdensome to collect information from suspicious people.

• Besides, there must be sufficient funds for development actors to mobilise local

stakeholders into sharing the same development agendas or umbrella with them.

For instance a goat offered to a chief might give social workers access to

interviews in some African communities just like providing elders with palm wine

in many communities in West Africa might lead to discussions about the politics

of these local environments.

These listed considerations above are not to be considered as conclusive as some

societies may use some, others will reject some perspectives while others may use all.

However if they are used as prerequisite tools for communication by social and

development workers, the following advantages could be achieved:

• Firstly, knowing historical and cultural contexts of communities facilitates

understanding of cultural and social institutions vital in assessing the capabilities

(Chambers and Conway, 1992) of given societies over time. It may also help in

assessing leadership roles in given communities and help in using community

 leaders in achieving communication goal. This helps strategies of mapping out

vulnerabilities induced by cultures and histories thereby facilitating interviews

with these sub-group that in most cases broker communal transition into

modernity. This can also be done by using livelihoods principles and frameworks

to identify how and with what resources people have over time resisted their

shocks and stresses (DFID Guidance sheets, 2001).

• More so, a better understanding of whether a community is heterogeneous or

homogeneous helps in understanding the causes of conflicts or power relations

(de Haan and Zoomers, 2005) in given communities. When this is understood

various power blocks will be contacted by communication or development actors

to get their perspectives on issues or to create platforms or bridges to modify

unprogressive power blocks into development mainstream or to positive

development action. This can also facilitate better understanding of the results of

questionnaires as it will add a socio-political dimension to short questionnaire

responses.

• Besides, understanding of whether communities are victims of urban or rural

marginalities reinforces the arguments on divergences in the interpretation of

poverty (Hall and Midgley, 2004) and well being (Arrey, 2008). Different

interpretations of poverty and well being can help to better the design of

communication devices aimed at introducing new or different models in given

communities or to re-examine equalities (Sen, 1992). It may also prevent the

communicator or social worker from disregarding important cultural principles

 and not jeopardise the initial rapport needed between community stakeholders and

communicators.

• Understanding linguistic and cultural inclinations will incidentally facilitate

understanding of the notions of respect and sacredness of man, objects, deities;

places etc which will also facilitate phrasing on these issues. This is vital as

improper use of words or poor treatment of title holders may result in disregard of

the work of social or development actors in communities. Social and development

actors must prove by proximity and participation that they mean good and

sustainable well being for the communities they engage in development dialogue.

This aspect is also important as it may help understanding or communication in

communities that are for instance patrimonial (Arrey, 2008) or influenced by

cultures with the mother imagery on the other hand. With this, it is possible to

critically extract from these categories other useful elements like the best ways to

address dignitaries, married women, gods and other issues incidentally such as

income bringing in families, the roles of women in communities, the nature of

dependencies in communities, communal assessment to risks and risk

management or to shocks and stresses.

• Communicating with established authorities in given communities creates

legitimacy which is necessary to mobilise social capital (Putnam, 1993) in

participating in social and development works or programmes. More people

participating will create a sense of communal ownership which is vital for

acceptance or rejection of a proposed development or communication package.

Communication with authorities also helps in comparing data gathered from

 interviews with less powerful and vulnerable sub-populations. This means that in

a village set up, it will be imperative to include a traditional ruler just like it may

be vital to include the Quarter Head in an urban slum as they command respect

and oversee compliance tools in their societies. However when dealing with

corrupt communities or with communal representatives who seek political power

it is imperative to constantly revise particular stand points on communal issues

from such leaders.

• Besides, understanding the suspicions of the poor towards remote governments

who have neglected development in rural areas (Thomas, 1985) is vital. It may

help gathering of information on bureaucratic bottlenecks, tribalism or nepotism

or even regional politics. It however should be taken cautiously as it may be

exaggerated to enhance the degree of neglect especially when communicators are

part of Aid Schemes for neglected communities.

• In defeating the imagery of drama and ritual embedded in many communities, the

communicator will be able to design informed interventions or communicate

scientific models with precision. If a villager thinks for instance his mountain god

can protect him from an eruption, it is the duty of the communicator to understand

that this villager actually believes in this view point. Knowing this will enhance a

need to create more convincing models to force the villager from moving at least

during eruptions. He may in such a case have to use videos of devastating

eruptions to blend scientific fact with cosmic logic.

• Finally, having sufficient funds permits the social or development worker to be

flexible with changes on the ground or to be proactive. For example if social

 workers become unpopular due to the misbehaviour of one of their team members

in a village community, only funds can facilitate a rapid meeting of elders,

traditional council or Village Head to redress the issue. Only funds may also

resolve the issue of fines if the particular social worker is guilty. Besides,

gathering of information in strange areas necessitates social lineages which in

many cases can only be sustained with a few financial drop outs.

In order to achieve effective communication in communities, social workers must not

only understand principles but must make them cohere with methodologies. They must

choose the right way to communicate with particular communities based on their

realities, contexts etc. Their contexts it should be noted includes their degree of exposure

to technologies like tape recorders, microphones, cameras, computers etc. This paper

considers the following methods as important vehicles at arriving at holistic and effective

communication.

• Oral communication is vital in societies where word by mouth is the main tool for

social interaction, decision making or response to danger. This is very common in

Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia and the communicator may well use it when dealing

with people in tribal meetings, self-help groups, village meetings, age group

meetings, elders’ conferences etc. Communicators must here blend their

knowledge of cultures to know best ways to approach these institutions. For

instance it may be vital to present palm wine and kola nuts in order to

communicate with elders in an Igbo or Ejagam village or to make the

communication flow even among youthful categories. This brings the

communicator nearer to the contexts and reduces suspicion especially in socially

 and economically cut off communities. Oral communication could be done as

structured, semi structured, open conversation and the communicator can use a

digital recording device, a tape recorder or even a microphone connected to a well

charged computer or lap top. Oral communication can also be burnt into CDs for

workshops, digital libraries and online sharing.

• Another form of communication is visual communication. This takes various

forms including dressing, eating, cultural participation etc. The field worker can

dress in the cultural wears of a given community to reduce cultural or racial

barriers or to enhance belonging and cosmic commonness. By eating the food of a

community he is participating in every day routine which in a way reinforces the

daily ritual and drama of that given society. This form of communication creates

friendships and reduces the suspicion to new development models or actors

mentioned above.

• Communication can be via structured questions that seek to address a particular

issue. They are usually thought not to be very flexible and should be used with

other information. Semi-structured communication on the other hand, can take the

form of questions that are a bit fluid and do not seek to get stereotype answers.

This is advantageous because it maintains the communication goal of the social

worker while given the community room to discuss other issues.

• Open conversations on their part take the form of loose unstructured dialogues.

This is best in making documentaries or in writing scenes for articles in

magazines, news papers or as learning videos for conferences. Open

conversations include all categories of people and all subjects. They are analysed
 at the end to reveal issues that people could not let out under pressure from

structured or semi structured interviews. Open conversations can also be audio

and can well be structured to suit radio programmes.

• Besides, one way of communicating that may be appropriate for all listed methods

above is wooing the marginalised. This is acting or asking information in a way

that the marginalised feels the social worker or the development actor is part and

parcel of their plights. This is possible when communicators have truly and

deeply integrated in particular communities and are now thought to be community

members. This has been seen contemporarily when social workers from different

regions are given traditional titles in other regions.

• Presenting the voices of the marginalised to powerful stakeholders in

communities might also cause the latter to deal with social workers as aware

actors. Dealing with them in such a manner might create more freedom of work. It

may arguably also lead to withdrawal in situations where the powerful actors

consider themselves the cause of destitution in such communities. It must be done

with good knowledge of the terrain and the discretion to use it must be based on a

well laid out strategy.

• Another tool for communication is that of Apparent Equality. This is done in a

way that the social agent assumes the role of being equal with the beneficiary.

Many advocate for participatory rural planning and appraisal as important tools

trimming the top-down dimension of classical interventions but phrasing is even

more important. The social worker must not sound as an ultimate provider or a

ruthless modifier of existent norms of a given society but as someone who wishes
 to work with existing potentials while learning locally to shape sustainable

development outcomes in such communities. This is however criticised by some

academic groups who hold that power actors like donors always mediate

development policy and communication (Cusworth and Franks, 1993) and

equality is only theoretical even in participatory approaches.

Therefore to better communication in the field, understanding of historical and cultural

institutions coupled with the realities of given communities is necessary. Detail

knowledge of contexts adds holism to the choice of communication devices. It also helps

in creating spaces for bridging modernity and history or orality and scientific fact. It can

also facilitate best policies for enhancing new technologies like multi-media in enclave

communities when development videos and audios are used as demonstrative tools or as

means of documenting community realities. Communication must thus be fluid to react to

various communities for there are different perspectives to social conflicts, poverty,

vulnerabilities or even the causes to marginalities. Bridging stand points via participatory

devices and partnerships is inevitable in shaping effective communication strategies and

interventions for social and development workers. This however will only work with a

pertinent variable: the availability of funds.

References

Chambers R, Conway G. (1992). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21st

Century, Discussion Paper 296, Institute of Development Studies: Brighton.

Cusworth and Franks, T. (1993) (Eds) Managing Projects in Developing Countries, Longman, New

York (see Chapters 5 and 10)

De Haan, L and Zoomers, A. (2005) Exploring the Frontiers of Livelihoods Research Development

and Change 36 (1): 27-47

DFID livelihoods guidance sheets: http://www.livelihoods.org/info/info-guidance sheets.html No.6.

Accessed June 2001

Ghai, D. and Vivian, J. (eds) (1992) Grassroots Environmental Action: People’s Participation in

Sustainable Development. London: Routledge.

Hall A, Midgley J. 2004. Social Policy for Development. Sage Publications: London.

I.M.Arrey (2008) “Can Patrons, Sub-Patrons and Mini-Patrons be the reason for Slow Market

Entries in Sub-Saharan Africa?”

Published online in http://www.community.eldis.org/falcazo

I.M.Arrey (2008) “Subjective Wellbeing a lucrative Contemporary Jargon for Development

Management?”

Published online in http://www.africancentreforcommunity.com

Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work. New Jersey: Princeton University Press

Sen A. 1992. Inequality Re-examined. Oxford University Press: Oxford.

Thomas, T., “Reorienting bureaucratic performance: A social learning approach to development

action” in J.-C.Garcia-Zamor (Ed.), Public Participation in Development Planning and

Management: Cases from Africa and Asia (Boulder, CO: Westview Press), pp.11-22.

©2007 African centre for community and development. All rights

reserved.