No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Up to a decade ago many labour movement strategists and analysts would probably have thought (though not necessarily said) that they were witnessing the beginning of the end of organized labour as a major political force. 'There is no alternative' was not just a triumphalist slogan of the political right but a palpable feeling across the political spectrum. But by the turn of the century the mood began to shift as the labour movement regained some ground after the long night of neo-liberal onslaughts. Maybe we were now at the 'end of the beginning' of a new era where the workers and their organisations will begin to impact on the new global order they have helped to create through their labour? That is, anyway, the premise of this presentation. It is not, however, a simple proclamatory vision, but rather seeks to present a realistic appraisal of the challenges of globalisation and possible responses by the labour movement. The challenges are many: from informalization to international migration, from routinization of labour practices to a sustained attempt by capital to make the world's workers pay for the collapse of the neoliberal globalization model in 2008. It is arguably time for a sober appraisal of where global labour is in terms of a fight-back or perhaps, even in terms of offering an alternative vision for humanity.

Purpose-International development practice has had as its dominant paradigm the rational-analytic model of project planning, management and evaluation. This is reflected in the widespread adoption by donor agencies of results-based management (RBM), side by side with conventionally used tools for monitoring and evaluation (including logical framework analysis ("logframe"), logic model and results frameworks). Donor agencies rely upon such tools to generate the evidence base for measuring "success" across the spectrum of their work, even though projects differ enormously in their nature, scope and time-span. Process-led capacity development projects and input-led infrastructural or straightforward service delivery projects require very different yardsticks of performance monitoring and appraisal. Drawing on insights from the complex adaptive systems (CAS) literature, the purpose of this paper is to explore how projects focused on capacity development necessitate a more eclectic approach, includingbut not restricted to-RBM methodology. Design/methodology/approach-Using the insights of CAS theory, and with particular reference to projects which have capacity development as their prime focus, this paper explores a broadening of conventional project management practices. Findings-The paper posits an integrative approach to managing international development projects focused on capacity developmentone which would recognise the values of instrumental utility and goal-setting associated with the application of the tools of RBM, while situating that within a more open, system focused and holistic approach to projects and their outcomes, placing emphasis on context, adaptability and learning. Research limitations/implications-The research enquiry presented is discursive rather than empirical, and builds on established theory and constructs of three distinct conceptual fields: first, the RBM approach to project and programme implementation; second, the "complexity" strand of organisational management literature; and third, the capacity development strand of international development discourse. Originality/value-The paper intersects disciplinary boundaries between project management, organisational studies and international development theory and practice.