1 Youth Work

8/3/2019 1 Youth Work

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/1-youth-work 1/18

The emphasis put on project management, project work and project planning in Europeanyouth work is relatively recent.

European or international youth work has been,for more than 100 years, primarily developedby youth associations, organisations and fe-derations of many kinds, but most of themstructured in the form of international youthorganisations. For decades these organisations

had a strong philosophical, religious, political oreducational basis, which was shared by all ormost of the organisations in the movement –a kind of precondition for co-operation.

The values that underpinned the activity anddevelopment of these organisations were essen-tial to their existence, and the promotion orconsolidation of those values was often themain reason for the organisations’ activities.

1.2 Associations and

projects: an historicalperspective

Most activities in European and internationalyouth work were organised for and by mem-bers or leaders of local or national branches(and less for an unspecified or open targetgroup), and the educational goals were oftenfocussed around the organisation and/or itsvalues (through e.g. theme seminars, gathe-rings, statutory meetings). Education was bythen often understood in a political sense(education for emancipation, liberation, self-

development or simply ideological education).Those organisations carrying out internationaltraining focussed mainly on the good organisa-tion of their seminars and meetings, or evenyouth exchanges (work camps, individualexchanges) rather than on training youth wor-kers, leaders or project managers. The leaderof an activity or project was also often some-one who had a political mandate or responsi-bility within the organisation. There were of course exceptions to this.

Among the reasons for this, one should point out:

The lack of specific funds or programmesstrictly for training or educational activitiesat the European or international level. The

existence of the European Youth Foundation(EYF) since the early 1970’s was truly excep-tional; however, the Foundation did not serveto change things significantly at that time,firstly because it was in itself a creation of asystem for itself, and secondly because thatwas also the way educational activities at aninternational level were understood. Trainingas such was not used much as a term, possiblybecause the statutes of the EYF and of the

European Youth Centres (EYC) clearly excludedprofessional training activities from the pro-gramme of the Centre.

The prevalence – at multiple levels – of ide-ologies and organisations which were bothself-excluding and hegemonic (of whichCommunist ideology is the best example, butnot the only one). They based themselves onsocial analysis and solutions that would besuitable to everyone (the reality was differentbut the purpose was the same). Non-formaleducation was a way to prepare for a “better”society, and to develop the “new man”.

The belief that social progress would progres-sively eradicate the problems of the system(social exclusion, marginalisation, injustice, etc.)and that the role of civil society – includingyouth movements – was less to solve thoseproblems than to act for social and politicalchange (to improve, to reform or to change thesystem).

The division of roles between social and youthservices on the one hand and youth organisa-tionson the other, where only the former beingthe ones that should be professionally trained

to respond to situations of social distress (pro-fessional competence or expertise, as opposedto political competence).

It would be untrue to pretend that internatio-nal youth work was not based on projects at all,at that time. But the fact is that projects wereunderstood as part of the development of theorganisation, which led to project managementbeing seen as less important than leadershiptraining and political training. In the trainingcourses of the European Youth Centre, includ-ing activities of the European Youth Foundation,the number of courses and activities makingan explicit use of projects as a methodology orcontent for training courses only became sig-nificant in the 1990s.

9

1. Projects in youth work

1.1 Project values and the value of projects

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit



1.3 European youthprogrammes andprojects

The changes that were accelerated after thebreakdown of the Communist regimes inCentral and Eastern Europe – trends, whichwere already noticeable in the early 1980’s –have naturally had major repercussions oninternational youth work. Global ideologieslost their credibility and importance, “interna-tionalism” lost momentum, curiously being

replaced by globalisation and the internation-alisation of world markets. Classical interna-tional youth work lost some of its importance,even if international youth organisations didnot lose their raison d’être nor, in many cases,their strength.

But the shift of emphasis in European youthwork that concerns us was also made morevisible and sometimes accentuated by otherfactors too:

• the emergence of youth programmes withthe European Community/Union and the

development of national youth policies

The Youth for Europe programme in particu-lar has added a new dimension to internationaland European youth work, which one couldsay is more open to all young people and,because of that, requires more involvementof youth workers and other socio-cultural pro-fessionals. What was until then a “privilege”of youth leaders and young people active ininternational youth organisations became

accessible to potentially any young personin Europe: working together with youngpeople from other countries, travelling andparticipating in a youth exchange. Regardlessof how democratic and accessible use pro-grammes actually are, their consequences forEuropean youth work have been enormous.

Besides opening up Europe to all young people,the Youth for Europe programme – and sub-sequently the European Voluntary Serviceprogramme – brought a new category of youthworkers to the European level: those working

at local level in youth associations, local youthservices or other types of services and orga-nisations. Many of these youth workers were

not informed by an ideology and sometimeseven had what some considered a “poor poli-tical education”. But now they were actors inEuropean youth policy and soon no Europeanyouth programme could do without them.

The management of European youth exchanges– and the emphasis put on their educationalfunction – stressed the need for project ma-nagement. Not only were youth exchanges con-ceived of as projects but they were also to beevaluated as such, both from an administra-tive and from an educational point of view –

with the emphasis falling on the principles andskills of project management.

The development and consolidation of theprogramme demanded the development of training. The impetus in training especiallyin the second and third phases of the pro-gramme, helped (or confirmed) the shift of emphasis from political/social education totechnical, administrative and managerial skills.Youth workers were now required to organiseprojects, to manage projects, and to report.And to the horror of some and the joy of many, “traditional” youth organisations werenow expected to do the same.

However, it would be wrong to suggest thatthis shift was strongly resisted. In reality therewas a process of adaptation that was quite fast,although not always without pain. The Long-Term Training Course of the Youth Directorateis symptomatic of this evolution. In its twofirst editions the course, then named “Long-termtraining course in international youth work”,was run against the tide, with an only half-disguised suspicion, if not open hostility, fromthe statutory bodies of the then European YouthCentre. Four years later, the course was oftenpresented and requested as the model. TheLong Term Training course (LTTC) has beenthe activity that has contributed the most to“popularising” principles of project management,because the course itself has been run on thebasis of projects as the tools for learning anddeveloping local youth work projects.

The development of youth programmes in theEuropean Union has also provided the star-ting point for the development of youth poli-cies in some member states. The creation of

national agencies for the programmes – andthe necessary budget allocations for that – hasstimulated the emergence of co-ordination and

10

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Factors that encouraged shift towards

project management inEuropean youth work



complementarity between national actions foryouth. In some countries, the procedures andmanagement principles of Youth for Europewere “imported” into other national youthprogrammes and policies. Note, for example,that within the programme there was littleprovision to cover the structural costs of organisations. In fact, organisations wererequested and expected to find matchingfunds (often more than 50%). Especially atthe beginning of the programme there wasalso a clear emphasis to attract projects fromformal youth groups in a clear and justifiedattempt to reach “common” young people.

• the economic and social crisis – affecting

young people – and the attack on, and subsequent reforms of, the welfare state

This is one of the most common argumentsput forward to explain the withdrawal of thepublic sector from many associative and socio-political projects. The (financial) crisis of manyEuropean states – together with the efforts forsetting up the single currency project withinthe European Union – has resulted in a short-

age of resources to support or follow-up “tra-ditional” socio-educational projects. Social andyouth projects had to become autonomousand accountable. Jobs were no longer secure,structures were no longer supported. Theemphasis was now put on results, the supportwas now allocated to projects, not to organi-sations.

Some of these arguments may seem very shal-low, partial and even provocative. But the dif-ference has been visible – if not in results atleast in philosophy and principles for youth

policy. Look for example at the idea that sup-port to youth (or other) organisations neverused to be as generous or careless as someanalysis seems to suggest. In most countries,youth organisations – especially internationalones – have had to fight hard to keep theirindependence and secure their survival.

That might partly explain some of the contra-dictions around the popularity of project man-agement: most associations, including youthorganisations, are in favour of it, not against(naturally, for they also strive for a better andmore efficient way of doing things). Indeed,

there is no discussion surrounding a stance proor against project management. Everyone – andrightly so – wants things to be done in the best

way possible, with an optimal use of resources,with the most visible and sustainable results,and with the best publicity.

• The import of business ideasand liberal ideology into the social sector

In addition to, and as a result of the above, thereis no doubt that the predominance of (neo)lib-eral ideology and principles and generally the“triumph” of capitalism has resulted in theimposition of business-like criteria within thenon-market sector, including civil society and

sometimes also state administration. Amongthe ones most relevant to our concerns in thispublication are principles such as accountabi-lity, profitability and, more generally businessmanagement applied to the non-governmentaland non-profit sector. Project managementhas not remained immune to these develop-ments. For the sake of the non-conformist,however, we can also say that the profit-mak-ing sector has also adapted many ideas fromthe non-profit making sector.

• the challenges of re-building democracy and civil society in Eastern Europe

The collapse of the Communist system in Easternand Central Europe called on “the West” tosupport the emerging democracies in Easternand Central Europe, a challenge which wastaken up very early by the Council of Europeand by international youth organisations. Inthe youth policy field, this meant an immediatechallenge to respond to needs that had moreto do with immediate and tangible results thanwith principles. Governmental and non-govern-mental partners in Eastern Europe wanted con-crete tools and skills to help them develop theirpolicies or simply survive in an atmospherewhere anything that did not seem businesscompliant was suspect or at least doomed tofail sooner or later.

Regardless of how pertinent the analysis andthe requests are or were, the fact is that projectmanagement courses supported the drive for achange and, especially, they opened up furtherthe demands for “business-like” professional orprofessionalised training. The repercussion of this is not difficult to imagine: besides the influ-ence this has had on those countries’ youthstructures and policies, it has also impacted onthe practice and the philosophy of European andinternational youth organisations. For some it islike beingseduced by the taste of the forbiddenfruit.

11

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Factors that encouraged

a shift towards project management inEuropean youth work



• the shifts of emphasis in political and development aid

At the same time, there was a serious shiftaround co-operation and assistance for devel-opment between the wealthier North and theneedier South. It is very probable that the shiftin development co-operation policies occurredas a result of general policy changes, mostlyinfluenced by factors already mentioned above.Nevertheless, we refer to it because it doesillustrate the difference. Due very much to theinfluence of non-governmental development

organisations, “donor countries” started to linkdevelopment aid or assistance to results and todemocratic conditions. Support is now almostexclusively for projects, with an emphasis onsmall scale projects, and not “policies”.

• postmodernism: individualisation

and fragmentation of young people

and youth groups

The erosion of collective models of associationand social participation by young people, toge-

ther with the development of their self-aware-ness and reflection – associated with the rejec-tion of models of reference – has meant, amongmany other factors, that long-term commit-ments are less fashionable and less suitableto the reality of young people today. In whatis also referred to as the “risk society”, the indivi-dual person has more to decide by him/herself, more to choose from and bears theresponsibility for shaping his/her own lifeand future.

The progressive disappearance of some com-

mon models of reference – social, cultural orpolitical – has also led to social fragmenta-tion among young people and to multipleidentification processes, both synchronic anddiachronic.

In this new environment youth organisationsand institutions are challenged to adapt andmodernise: long-term programmes and com-mitments are much more difficult. The wordis short-term and if possible “now”. In fact, manyyouth workers say how difficult it is to keepyoung people’s interest and commitment in

something as exciting and potentially moti-vating as a youth exchange, if it implies aduration of over six months.

Idealism and political engagement have beenreplaced by realism and action, qualities asso-ciated with small scale community and groupprojects. Visible results and experience “now!”are more attractive as something new andimmediately “socially marketable” by givingcredit to those involved in it – a reflection of consumer habits and the need to get the la-test model in clothes, computers or portablephones (and notice how quickly things areout of trend), as well as the development andpopularity of new and “radical” sports.

Young people are less likely to commit them-selves to an organisation, programme or cause.What was before an expression of global con-cern (eg. racism, poverty, war) seems to havebeen replaced by concerns about globalisationand how to participate in it through other meanssuch as the Internet. In this context it is easierto commit and participate in a project thanin any organisation. The project is short ormedium-term, is flexible and has concreteand visible results. Similarly, the young peo-ple can contribute to shaping and managingthe project without having to “jump” through

the successive levels of leadership in the organ-isation.

1.4 Management,Management!

It is difficult to see how much these factors havebeen a consequence or a cause of the changeof priorities, thinking and language, regarding

activities and programmes in European youthprojects. The fact is that when looked attogether they help to understand why projectand project management have become thetrendy words and approach in the 1990’s.

Some of those changes were actually less deep– or less radical – than they seemed to be. Themajor differences are not in the nature of whatis being preached, taught or done, but in howseriously it is taken and adopted, and the lan-guage used. The very nature and reality of civilsociety, which international youth organi-

sations are part of, would suffice to makeanyone aware of the risks of over-hasty ge-neralisation.

12

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Factors that encouraged a shift towards

project management inEuropean youth work



The fact that the language and principles of project management are popular, does notmean necessarily:• That projects and project management did

not exist before;• That the quality of the work undertaken

today is higher than before;• That there were plenty of resources, which

were not well used• That everyone is now a great project ma-

nager and that there are no hiccups at dif-ferent levels.

Let us not forget that part of the changes men-tioned above have been stimulated becausethere are more resources now than before (eg.for European youth projects), and the num-ber of institutions and partners involved hasalso grown exponentially. A drive for efficiencyand accountability – having to do in the firstplace with the quality of projects – was thusinevitable.

1.5 Values before

and values after

We can also look into this by recalling andanalysing what values are involved in projectmanagement and in youth work. What arethey? Have they changed?

• Efficiency

Project planning methodologies allow orga-nisations and institutions to be more efficientby placing an emphasis on the concrete needsof a given situation or group of people. Bylimiting the field of intervention and antici-pating the results as concretely as possible, theresources will be used in a better way andoverall efficiency should improve. By focussingthe scope of intervention there is the guaranteethat results will be achieved as there is lessdispersion of effort and the contribution andinvolvement from the different actors involvedis more coherent and better coordinated.

• Accountability and (shared) responsibility

Whereas in an organisation or group the respon-sibility for activities lies with the politically

responsible (the elected board), project ma-nagement has put the focus on the projectleader or team. These people have a high degreeof autonomy in how to proceed and managethe project once the objectives have beenclarified and agreed with the political level.Consequences of this include the fact thatthe responsibility for the project is clearer asit is easier to identify those in charge of each of the steps. It is also more “empowering” as itgives workers, members or volunteers, a clearshare of responsibility and therefore of power.Accountability comes also from the extendedpossibilities for evaluation and assessment –as well as reporting – of the project.

• Equality and independence

Projects usually must comply to criteria andpriorities, both formal and content-wise. It isthe fulfilment of the criteria and the respectof the pre-defined priorities that determinethe elegibility of projects for funding or forother forms of support. In this way, all pro-

jects are “equal”, at least in the sense that theyall must fulfil similar criteria. Nepotism is thusprevented and the allocation of favours or pri-vileges to one organisation or the other needsto be justified. All organisations are thus, a priori , on an equal footing, the quality of theproject being the deciding element. And thedecision-makers can decide with greater inde-pendence – less bound to alliances and pres-sures. In fact, the decisions are often taken byso-called expert committees that are supposedto be less subject to political pressure. Thissituation should work to the advantage of “political” organisations as they would complywith the same rules and avoid the need for

justification.

• Economy and consistency

Projects funding allows sponsors to better seethe use of their money (ie. to make sure thatbudgets are used for what they were meant). Itmakes seeing deviations in the use of themoney more easy.By allocating specific resources to the imple-mentation of objectives and concrete activi-ties, it is also possible to increase the efficient

use of resources or at least limit unreasonableor uncontrolled spending or inadequate pro-ducts. The fact that the project has a set time

13

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Changing valuesin project management

and youth work



frame and possibly includes different check-points for evaluation and monitoring may easethe financial control and management of theproject, namely by speeding up the process of interventions and corrections.The need for each activity of the project to bein line with the aims and objectives and to “fit”within the overall project framework makescoherence and consistency easier to follow, inthe same way as it carries the potential to limit“deviations” or distortions.

• Quality

Quality as a result of project management ispotentially improved by the extended possi-bilities to optimise the identification of skills,resources and procedures for a given set of objectives. Resources are identified in relationto the specific need and purpose of the project.Monitoring and evaluation are important toolsto “measure” quality, or at least to check therate of progress against the objectives or tar-gets set, both quantitatively and qualitatively.Doing better and doing the best possible is

made easier by working on a project basis asthe options are clearer to identify.

• Realism

The essence of projects is that they must berealistic, just as the objectives must be achie-vable. Realism is an important value in so far asit helps to eliminate projects whose aims areinadequate or inconsistent with the size,capacity or scope of the promoting organisa-tions. Realism means the prevalence of the

mind and reason over the heart or the soul.Realism is also a motivation in the sense thatrealism makes achievement more likely andthus the project potentially more visible.Turning great ideas into visible practice andresults could be a motto for projects.

• Flexibility

The project needs to be planned, implementedand evaluated. Sound project managementallows for – and calls for – changes to be intro-

duced as a result of on-going progress andregular evaluations. Dysfunctions and distor-tions in the planning stages can thus be corrected

and, especially, the different components of the project may be adapted and adjusted tounforeseen changes or evolution.

• Transparency and visibility

Accountability means also transparency andvisibility. Transparency because the allocationof public (or private) resources and their impacton policies and programmes is more clear andtraceable. It is not anymore so much a matterof who got money or subsidies, and how much,

but what they got it for – and what was achievedwith it. In addition to promoting transparen-cy – and supposedly preventing nepotism orfavouritism – working through projects mayincrease the visibility of policies and pro-grammes – as there are always results thatare tangible, that can be shown and graspedeasily, through the media and through otherchannels of communication.Visibility is as important for the project teamand organisation (mobilisation, public relations,communication, publicity, motivation) as it isfor the sponsors and promoters, who also

need to justify, demonstrate, publicise... whatthey do with the funds they administrate.In other words, an organisation, vision orpriority is marketed better through projects.Transparency serves also as a “guarantee” of honesty and integrity, values which are crucialto any non-profit making organisation.

• Creativity and innovation

Creative and innovative projects have foundnew ways of doing things, new methods to

achieve aims and objectives. Working throughprojects forces every new project to be diffe-rent and unique – the principle of innovation.In doing so, it stimulates the creativity in peo-ple and organisations. The search for betterperformance and for appraisals or evaluationis a stimulus to non-conformism and uncon-ventionalism, themselves also importantmotivation factors in organisations. Creativityand innovation embody the need to be closerto the reality of the young people or of thecommunity, and to interact with other peo-ple, organisations and trend-setters. Creativity

and innovation also rhyme very well withmodernity and modernisation – crucial con-cepts of our time.

14

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Changing valuesin project management

and youth work



• Competition

One of the most important values of the post-modern society – and of neo-liberal manage-ment and ideology – competition is increasedand optimised through (youth) policies basedon the funding of projects. By setting generalconditions for projects, public and privatefunding institutions put pressure on theapplicants to be more performant, efficientand, above all, to be supportable by beinggood or better. For there are never sufficientresources for all projects... a selection hasalways to be made. Competition is certainly

not risk-free, but it surely forces project teamsand organisations alike to be and to do theirbest in order to be funded, to remain floatingand to be recognised.

• Participation, modernity and employability

What has been outlined above as characteris-tics of young people in post-modern societies –namely the suitability of the project to indi-vidualisation and to fragmentation – also meansthat for many young people and youth work-ers alike project work provides a useful and

accessible opportunity for valuable learning,and experience, which is transferable to the

job market.

To be able to think about and practise themanagement of activities as projects is also toacquire, develop and practise skills in plan-ning and management. It is to learn how toexercise responsibility and autonomy throughnon-formal education activities. The oppor-tunity it provides in experiential learning –especially if adequately supported by educa-tional evaluation techniques – is invaluablefor breaking through patterns of low self-

esteem, mistrust and situations of marginali-sation and exclusion. Project work, and theteam work implied – development of socialand communication skills – is thus motiva-tional and empowering, by giving relevanceand value to small, achievable, changeswhose visibility may break through patternsof marginalisation and low self-confidence.

Of course, these forms of social participationare very different from other “traditional” formsof social participation. They have the advan-tage of being more suitable and accessible formany young people today, even if they are

not yet or not always properly valued andrecognised. They remain a continuing chal-lenge for many youth and project workers.

Small-scale projects also have the potential tomobilise the community around the projectand – remembering the above commentsabout realism and visibility – contribute to thedevelopment of community participation. Theymay also promote the status of the youngpeople inside the community, via the mean-ingfulness of the project and the values itmay carry.

1.6 The valuesin the project

Using projects as a way to plan, organise anddeliver programmes and activities or as a toolfor the management of people and resourcessays little about what the projects are for.Project planning and management as suchare nearly value-free techniques that can beapplied in the public and private sectors, aswell as in civil society.

European youth work, however, is not value-neutral. European youth work, and nationalyouth work too, is guided and oriented accord-ing to priorities and values that are themselvesthe expression of an implicit or explicit youthpolicy. The simple term “European youth pro-

ject” carries in itself already a certain philoso-phy: trans-nationality and European co-oper-ation, probably also participation, education,autonomy by being a project either by or withyoung people. Furthermore, the youth policiesand programmes of the European Commissionand of the Council of Europe have their ownvalues which projects run within their frame-work should respect and promote.

At the level of the European Union

• Mobility and solidarityThe capacity and motivation of young peopleto go to live and work in another country areimportant, as a way to promote the singlemarket, freedom of movement of labour, etc.Mobility of young people is also an asset to

break through isolation, alienation or passivity,in as far as it implies “mental mobility”, too.Mobility and solidarity go together – as in the

15

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Important elementsin running European

youth projects



decision on the European Voluntary Serviceprogramme (EVS) – because Europe should notbe seen only as a space to develop a free mar-ket, including freedom of movement. TheEuropean integration process can only besuccessful on the political, social and culturallevels if there is also an understanding of theneed for solidarity and, thus, perceiving Europeas a space for solidarity instead of a groundfor competition.

• Self-reliance and creativity of young peopleEuropean youth projects must be planned and

run in a way that stimulates autonomy, self-reliance and creativity. These values have majorimplications in the way the project is pre-pared and run, on the role that young peoplehave in it (owners/participants and not con-sumers) and, of course, on the objectives pur-sued and in the attitudes promoted. It is alsointeresting how self-reliance and creativity areput together as values.

• Understanding cultural diversityCultural diversity is obvious when one looksat the European continent (and most continents,

for that matter). The recognition of culturaldiversity as a normal situation and the positivevalue and understanding given to it are partof the cornerstones of building Europe whilerespecting cultural difference. It is also a pre-condition for intercultural learning.

• Combating racism, xenophobiaand anti-semitism

Together with valuing and understanding cul-tural diversity, raising awareness about thedangers of racism, xenophobia and anti-semitismis one of the main themes of European pro-

grammes. Without awareness raising therecan hardly be respect for and understandingof cultural diversity and, ultimately, of otherEuropeans and non-Europeans alike.

• Developing a European dimension

or identityThe Youth for Europe programme talks of “enabling young people to view the EuropeanUnion as an integral part of their historical,political, cultural and social environment”,which is possibly the most explicit referenceto what is referred in other instances of the

programme as the “European dimension oridentity”. In line with other texts of this andother programmes, the explicit purpose is not

to create a new identity to replace national(or other identities) but rather to develop anunderstanding of the role of the EuropeanUnion – and the European integration process– as part of the present and future. Thisincludes a call/need to connect the Europeandimension to the local and national levels.At the same time, those involved in definingthis policy took care to make sure that theEuropean dimension was not exclusive toEuropean Union member states. Hence thetwo programmes (Youth for Europe, EVS) areopen to other countries (either as programmecountries or as third countries), although todifferent degrees and in different ways (itseems to work easier on a reciprocal basis foryouth exchanges).

• Active participation of young peoplein society and institutions

“Encouraging young people to take an activepart in society via non-profit-making associa-tions and organisations”, means a recognitionof the crucial role of civil society, associationsand organisations in developing participationand citizenship. This simultaneously, implies the

importance of the non-profit sector in gener-al (as European youth programmes are most-ly educational and run on a non-profit basis).The Youth programmes refer to “enablingyoung people to become aware of the impor-tance of democracy in the organisation of society and thus encourage them to play anactive part in its institutions”. Further down,reference is made to the need for “allowingyoung people to express their opinions on theorganisation of society and encourage the vari-ous public authorities involved to take heedthereof” an explicit reference to the need of public institutions to open up and sustain thedesire for youth participation.

• Participation of disadvantagedyoung people

Both programmes give priority to the participa-tion of disadvantaged young people, in a recog-nition of the importance of social cohesion andof the accessibility to European programmesto all young people. This is translated practi-cally through several measures, includingadded possibilities for financial support. Theobjective includes also a call for the youngpeople (presumably “non-excluded”) to be made

aware of the risks of social exclusion. The samespirit is to be found in EVS: “(...) to facilitateaccess to the programme for all young people”.

16

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit


youth projects



• Equal participation of men and womenBoth programmes stress the importance of safe-guarding, pursuing and raising awareness of equality between men and women. The Youthfor Europe programme talks also of encou-raging women’s participation: “making youngpeople sensitive to the need to ensure equalopportunities for men and women and toencourage women to lead an active life in allsectors of society.” In the European VoluntaryService, this appears also as a general conditionunder which the programme is run: “(...) It isintended [EVS programme], while respectingequal opportunities for men and women, toencourage mobility and solidarity (...)”, itself areflection of general policy principles of theEuropean Union as it can be read in the pre-ambles of the decisions.

• Independence, initiative and creativity“Encouraging independence, creativity and anentrepreneurial spirit among young people,in particular at the social, civic, cultural andenvironmental levels” is one of the objectivesof the Youth for Europe programme, in itsconcerns with the need to boost the employ-ability of young people. In this sense, EVS

goes further: “encourage a spirit of initiative,creativity and solidarity among young peo-ple so as to enable them to become activelyintegrated into society (...)”. These values gobeyond the social and political into educa-tional and training objectives: the involvementin a European project, mostly through a stayabroad, opens young people’s mind and devel-ops their autonomy, independence and cre-ativity. The role of non-formal education toachieve this seems to be further acknowledgedin the new Youth programme.

• Intercultural learningIntercultural learning is a theme that can befound throughout the whole of the youthprogramme, either as an objective, as a con-dition or as a need. In the Youth for Europeprogramme, intercultural learning is both partof the social objectives (solidarity, humanrights, awareness of cultural diversity) and of the educational objectives too (see applica-tion and report forms, or the guide for appli-cants).Intercultural learning should also be consi-dered together with the other aspects of theEuropean dimension and openness to third

countries (including that of young people of immigrant origin getting to know their originalculture).

Finally, values related to intercultural learningcan be found in the renewed objectives forpromoting the respect for “cultural diversityand its fundamental common values” with-in the context of “responsible cit izenship”.

• Recognition and promotion of informaleducation

The role of informal education in pursuingsocial and educational objectives is visiblethroughout the existing youth programmes,not least because they are programmes withan educational purpose outside formal edu-

cation.Informal education is also placed in the con-text of pursuing life-long learning and trai-ning, for which it has “a fundamental role toplay to enhance employability, adaptabilityand the culture of entrepreneurship and topromote equal opportunities.”1 Similarly, thenew programme aims also “To stimulate recog-nition of informal education acquired withina European context”.

At the level of the Council of Europe

The main values and orientations of the Councilof Europe youth policy were formally adoptedby its Committee of Ministers in Resolution(98) 6 of 16 April 1998, themselves the poli-tical affirmation of the priorities and practicesof the Council’s Youth Directorate.

• Help young people to meet challengesand their own aspirations

Youth policy is placed under the priority andperspectives of the young people themselves,

rather than the institutions’, in the spirit of disseminating the values of peace, freedomand solidarity.

• Particular attention to disadvantagedyoung people

In view of “contributing to social cohesion,especially by combatting exclusion”, the spe-cial concern for disadvantaged young peopleis a guiding principle of the objectives of theyouth policy of the Council of Europe.

17

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

1

Common Position (EC) No 22/1999 of the Council of Ministers adopted on 28 June 1999 with a view to adop-ting a decision establishing the “Youth” Community actionprogramme (Official Journal, 22/07/99).


youth projects



• Participation and strengthening of civilsociety

The development and strengthening of civilsociety appears natural in an organisation con-cerned in the first place with advancing humanrights and democracy. Young people’s partici-pation and involvement in the decisions thatconcern them has also been one of the pillarsof the Council’s youth field since its creation,namely through the development of so calledco-management between governmental bodiesand youth organisations. This objective, amongothers, is to be pursued by the promotion of “training for democratic citizenship.”

• Youth mobilityThe importance of youth mobility for theCouncil of Europe should also be read inthe light of the pan-continental dimension of the organisation and the numerous obstaclesstill existing to the mobility of young peoplebetween the Eastern and Western parts of Europe.

• Intercultural dialogueResolution (98) 6 talks of intercultural dialogueas one of the priorities of the Council of Europe’s

policy “in a spirit of respect for diversity”. TheEuropean Youth Centres (EYCs) and EuropeanYouth Foundation (EYF) have had a key rolein deepening and disseminating interculturallearning in non-formal education activities.Intercultural learning has impregnated all thetraining and education activities of the Councilof Europe in the youth field, including co-opera-tion with the Union in this field. The referenceto intercultural dialogue is also an encourage-ment to further co-operation and understand-ing of trans-national and European co-operationwithin each society, namely through safeguar-ding and advancing minority rights.

• Commitment to human rightsand democracy

In view of what has been said above concer-ning intercultural dialogue, priority is also givento “combatting of racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism, intolerance” as well as “all movementsaiming to undermine democracy”. The con-solidation of democracy and human rights isalso explicitly mentioned as a key priority, bythe development of young people’s awarenessand commitment.

• Encouragement of new forms of youth

participationPossibly more inward-looking than the othervalues and priorities mentioned earlier, new

forms of youth participation is neverthelessan important priority in the sense that it reflectsthe ever-changing nature of young people andthe need for regular adjustments of youth policyand programmes, including also Europeanyouth projects.

• Training for responsibilityIn accordance with the role of “training fordemocratic citizenship” and the role of non-formal education, the Council of Europe putsa priority on “training young people to assumeresponsibilities”. This can be understood asacknowledging the specific role of civil soci-

ety and the “school for democracy” whichnon-governmental organisations, and particu-larly youth organisations, represent.

• Development of youth policiesResolution (98) 6 lists several objectives andpriorities related to the development andrecognition of youth policy in as far as it canhelp “make more of the potential offered byyoung people”, an important statement whenapplied to managing youth projects. Underyouth policy development, mention is madeof the development of suitable legislationand structures, exchange of information andgood practices, etc. This is also an admissionof the fact that the development of a Councilof Europe youth policy can not be pursuedwithout the development of national youthpolicies.Although apparently more formal than theprevious values, the form and structures inyouth policy are likely to influence signifi-cantly the form and role of youth projects ina given country. The definition of priorities,the funding institutions, the decision-makingprocess on youth projects, to name just a fewelements, reflect the differences in national

youth policy priorities and structures.

These values in our projects

For our purpose and for the running of Europeanyouth projects, it is not necessary to know allthese values and principles. It is not neces-sary either to respect them all in one project.However, it is of fundamental importance:

To know the values according to which werun our projects.

These, as we shall see, must be determinedby the target group of young people involved,by the organisation or institution carrying or

18

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Important elements

in running European youth projects



promoting the project, and by ourselves asindividuals or teams acting as project leaders.Finally, to be financially feasible, they mustbe compatible with some of the values orpriorities of the European institutions – orother sponsors.The key values of each of these partners neednot be the same. They should, however, becompatible. And for that, it is important forthe project leadership to be aware of them,and at least identify and discuss them impli-citly or explicitly. This way, whenever keychoices or priorities need to be decided theleadership has a solid and shared moral orpolitical basis to inform their decisions.

In the case of European projects, to be clearabout the reasons for engaging in Europeancooperation.Europe is more than the possibility to get fund-ing for an exchange project or for a trip abroad.For young people, the value and impact of anexperience abroad can be very important. Itis thus crucial that the project leadership isclear about what drives them so that youngpeople also benefit from the experience – notto say that the objectives of European institu-

tions should be embraced as a new religionor as an imposed programme element

To be able to stay in controlPossibly the most important skill and attitudeof the project leadership is to be able to stayin control of the project, to steer the projectinstead of being steered by events and bythird parties. To do so, it is necessary to haveclear priorities, objectives and also key valuesand principles, including those having a par-ticular impact on the educational process.

To be aware of limitsA project can be a very unique and enrichingexperience, but a project is just a project, justlike a person is just a person. Both have limitsin terms of objectives, scope, time, etc. A pro-

ject alone can not change society. But it maycontribute to addressing or solving a particu-lar issue or problem. Working by projects isto prioritise and to exclude that which is nota priority. Establishing priorities implies estab-lishing criteria according to... values, objectivesor needs. Being aware of the limits is also impor-tant in order to give adequate value to changes

and to results – not everything can be changedat once; not everything can be solved througheducation

• To get adequate training or preparationWe have seen in the previous chapter howimportant the non-formal training of youngpeople has become to the European institu-tions and the European youth programmes. If we talk of something as common – and cru-cially important as intercultural learning orparticipation, it is not realistic to expect thatevery youth worker or leader will automati-cally be competent in those areas if they arenot adequately trained. The organisation of and participation in adequate training activi-ties may thus be very important, not only forthe success of the project but also for theachievement of its educational objectives.

To be able to translate and to adapt thosevalues to young peopleThe role of the youth worker, leader or edu-cator (who may be different from the projectmanager) will be to adapt and to translate thosevalues and educational principles into a pro-gramme suitable to the young people. It is alsoto be able to understand and communicate withyoung people in order to understand theirvalues and to incorporate them into the pro-

ject and its methodology.

1.7 The limitsof project-orientedpolicies

Projects also have limits

The project is first and foremost a tool for socialchange, or at least that is the way that we

19

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit


youth projects

THE YOUNGPEOPLE

OBJECTIVES

ORGANISATION LEADERSHIP

Valuesand

Principles



would like to see it understood in youth andsocial work. Projects are rarely an end in them-selves, they are just a different way to plan,organise, mobilise and achieve. Of course, theirpotential for optimising resources and invol-ving people makes them perhaps an exceptio-nally well suited tool, particularly for Europeanyouth programmes. However, on top of theadvantages of project management listed above,we should also be able to identify and be awareof its risks and limitations.

Increased control and vulnerability

Reduced support for programmes and organisa-tions to the benefit of projects makes the orga-nisations more vulnerable to funding for specificprojects – which often have restrictive or spe-cific objectives and form. It is also easier tocontrol the organisation’s development bythe number and size of projects supported.Limiting support for project may prevent thedevelopment of programmes and, in anycase, limit the possibilities of expansion of anorganisation. As many projects are decidedon a regular basis (annually or bi-annually)

the independence and freedom of movementof the organisation may be constrained as de facto the sponsors (often public institutions)have more ways of control, possibly underthe disguise of equality or quality of the pro-

jects. Finally, the emphasis on projects allowsgovernments to easily shape the scope of activities by NGOs, by deciding what is fund-able and what is not. An alternative could beto start from the youth organisations’ needsand perspectives.

Short-term perspectivesof youth policy and programmes

While we all agree that it is important foryouth work institutions to remain in tune withyoung people – and thus be able to act andreact by permanent adaptation – the empha-sis on projects as tools for policies should nothinder medium and long-term policy goals.Pursuing deeper and on-going changes insociety can not be done only through short-term projects. Many projects are, unfortu-nately, run under the pressure of: involvingmany people (visible, presentable, big num-

bers) and involving different young people allthe time (avoidance of cliques, demonstrateopenness, etc.), which does prevent – or at least

makes difficult – a medium-term approach towork with some groups of young people. Initself, this approach is partly the cause of thedisengagement of young people – a phenom-enon that it is also a consequence of.

Many and small projects

The general development of youth policy atEuropean level has also meant that the stateshave new or at least different possibilities toinfluence young people and youth partners,not always driven by noble principles alone.

The search for media attention and “marketableresults” is sometimes translated into a prefe-rence for quantity over quality. There are manyexamples of projects getting insufficient fund-ing or coverage to be run with a minimum of quality, but enough to create “clientele” effectsor to allow the politician in charge to presentlarge figures to the press before the next elec-tions.

Extra pressure on youth workers

The past years have seen increased pressurebeing put on professional youth workers todevelop and to manage projects. In some casesthis has gone as far as “transforming” the wholeassignments into projects (with certain posi-tive results as well), but even when it has notgone this far, youth workers may be put underpressure to “think differently and do diffe-rently”. Youth workers are asked to be pro-

ject managers, administrators and fundraisingexperts. Notwithstanding the often necessaryreasons for that, the fact is that youth wor-kers are increasingly given responsibilities forwhich they are not necessarily competent. Of

course the professional “market” value of youthworkers will come out increased, but there isa risk that this is done at the expense of acloser relationship to young people, and of thestability and security which are traditionallylow in this area of work. The risks of demoti-vation and disengagement should thus notbe underestimated. Part of the impact of suchpolicies may also be visible in the progressivenumbers of youth workers that are “requested”to work on a consultancy or freelance basis.

True projects with false needs

The priority given to project support as a formof youth policy may have the perverse effect

20

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit


youth projects



of generating unnecessary projects or rather,projects whose needs are not obvious. Thismay be especially true when organisations relyon project money to survive or to keep someessential services or posts that would not bepossible otherwise. Although the project qua-lity might not be at stake, there may be anartificial priority for the projects – sometimesvisible in organisations that are involved inall kinds of projects.

Same but not equal

The democracy of support through projects –by putting emphasis on each project’s qualityand less on the status of the project carrier(although probably that always plays a role,at least in terms of previous records) – may insome cases lead to a similar treatment of verydifferent realities. The conditions for carryingout a project successfully depend on manyaspects: previous experience, dimension andfunding of the organisation, its structural capa-city to manage delays in payments, its capacityto generate internal synergies and mobilisedifferent levels of expertise, etc. This is often

highlighted by the growing tendency to requestorganisations to fundraise or find matchingfunds for substantial parts of the budget. It isclear that some organisations are better sui-ted to this than others (including being able toformally fit into criteria), the latter having torun a project on a very high risk and questio-nable quality or be forced to drop the project.It would be interesting, for example, to researchthe number of small organisations which werefinancially “burned” in Youth for Europe actionD projects, to name only one of the most wellknown cases. This is where the principle of equality may clash with the proclaimed value

of accessibility of (European) youth pro-grammes to all young people. ParaphrasingOrwell “All projects are equal but some maybe more equal than others”.

Distortions in youth policy and project management

Of course all the risks – some very real – of youth policies based on project managementare, at the end of the day, distortions either inproject management or simply distortions inthe definition and steering of youth policies

and programmes. They are not intrinsic toproject management and can be prevented orcorrected.

It is also true that other ways of developingyouth policies and supporting youth pro-grammes have similar risks, sometimes on agreater scale, while presenting less advan-tages compared with project management.

It should also be argued that the implementa-tion of youth policies and programmes requiresprofessionals who are aware of their role, powerand influence, and who need to be adequatelytrained and monitored.

It remains true that projects and programmesare the reflection of political values and prior-

ities and that these include, in many countries,the possibility for the decision-maker or politi-cian to influence projects and to have a sayon the allocation of public resources (namelythrough projects). Projects are always, at theend of the day, an expression of a policy which,in a representative democracy, always includesstriking a balance between different vestedinterests.

It is thus important to recall what has been saidearlier: project management is essentially atool with many functions and attributes. Whatyouth policy makers and practitioners makeof it depends on their capacities and skills, ontheir values and on their interests, and ontheir capacity to learn.

The intercultural dimension of projects

Whether the project to be undertaken is runwithin the framework of the Council of Europeor the European Union programmes or at apurely national level, there is one dimensionthat is becoming increasingly present at alllevels of youth work, and that is intercultural

learning.

Intercultural learning has become over theyears a criterion and a dimension that hasacquired growing importance. It is found aspart of the objectives of programmes, the pri-orities of youth policies, concrete objectivesof projects and also as a methodology. It canbe found in many books, in the legal textsabout youth policies in Europe, in the appli-cation forms and report forms for projects. Itcan also be found in the programme of activ-ities of many youth projects.

We have already seen the extent to which it isa value, priority and a methodology in the pro-grammes of the Council of Europe and of the

21

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit


youth projects



European Union. We have also explored brieflyits double role in promoting a better under-standing of the differences between countriesand within the same country (e.g. between themajority and minorities, immigrants, etc.).

Intercultural learning as such is the object of another training kit being produced in thisseries. We shall thus refrain from expanding ona theme that is developed elsewhere and aboutwhich there is an extensive methodological, prac-tical and theoretical literature. At this stagewe would like to draw attention to the inter-cultural interferences that are likely to occurin the management of a project, whether theyresult from European partnerships or frominvolving several cultures in a project “athome”.

1.8 Culture and projectmanagament

The “cultural interference” may be more orless perceptible – or blamed for difficulties –depending also on the level of acquaintanceof the people with the theme. But intercultu-ral learning and the curiosity about the xenos abroad or at home, are also responsible for alot of the excitement and motivation to run aproject or to participate in one. One of thechallenges with intercultural learning is thatit is never easy to say for sure what in one’sattitude is related to culture or to personality.Similarly, running an intercultural project oftenimplies working in at least one other foreign

language – hence increasing communicationhazards – and certainly experiencing misun-derstandings which will be attributed eitherto language or communication difficulties orto cultural difference. The distinction is per-haps unclear because language is also part of culture, but the tendency to ethnicise andgeneralise individual experiences and beha-viors – by associating them with stereotypedcultural characteristics is very strong and per-haps the first step into cultural awareness.

A lot of research has been put into the influ-ences of culture on different management styles

and practices but not necessarily lead to def-inite conclusions, although highlighting certainexisting relationships, along the lines of “Yo

no creo en las brujas, pero que las hay, lashay”2 . Cultural difference seems to be respon-sible for many funny and less funny situa-tions occurring in multicultural projects. Whilenot attempting to be innovative, nor evencomplete, we would still like to mentionsome of the areas where conflicts, confusion,frustration or excitement are likely to occur inrelation to project management.

Culture and power

All cultures are equal in value, but we do not

always perceive it that way. We tend to establishhierarchies between cultures, usually startingfrom our own (“better or worse”, more or less“developed”, “stronger or weaker”, etc.).

Planning and managing projects involves alwaysa more or less explicit negotiation and harmo-nisation of different but usually compatibleinterests. The perception of oneself and theperception of the other influence the way inwhich the partners will negotiate and find solu-tions to their challenges.

Who takes the initiative for the project? Who

sets the limits? Who defines the priorities?Who decides what is suitable and what is notsuitable? Who is “visiting” whom and who is“at home”? Who “owns” the project?

These are just some of the questions that arelikely to interfere with a smooth negotiationand implementation of the project and whereculture will play a role.

Culture and organisation

Who is well organised in Europe and who ispoorly organised? Who defines what a goodorganisation is? What are the criteria for goodand efficient organisation?

The criteria for efficiency and for organisa-tion – and the project is a master example of organising an effort or an intention – are oftenassumed to be universal. Yet, they are taught,practiced and evaluated in sometimes radi-cally different ways. A step by step approachwill be ideal for some, while others will feelcomfortable in advancing several steps at the

22

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

2 “I do not believe in witches, but they surely exist .” Thesentence is attributed to Federico García Llorca.


youth projects



same time. The role of improvisation – whichin different circumstances would sometimesbe called creativity – is one of the most con-flictual ones; in fact it is the meeting (or not)of expectations and confrontation of ways of doing that is often at stake.

Culture and time

Similarly, who is well organised is the ques-tion of who is on time. Time management isoften a euphemism to designate punctuality.We all know who in Europe has the reputation

for being punctual, never punctual and eventoo punctual. Respect is a word that jumpsout very quickly in these moments, drivingthe feelings and discussions to the emotionallevel very quickly. Yes, one hour is composedof sixty minutes, everyone agrees, but the lo-gical consequences of that are understood verydifferently.

The interference and interactionof different factors infl uencing the processof intercultural cooperation may make the

process of understanding it – and managingit successfully – more dif fi cult.

Culture and communication

Communication is itself a source of conflict,especially in situations of conflict or tension.What to communicate, how to communicate it

and when? What is important to tell a partnerand what should be left implicit? What isthe level of commitment to a communication

process and what is the role of communica-tion for the sake of... communication? Why dopartnerships that seem to start so well, carriedout by the best of friends in a training courseor study visit, sometimes get stuck because of lack of communication? How far is it possibleto attempt to understand another culture?

Culture and money

Economic power and capacity – real andassumed – have a strong influence in the qua-lity and nature of intercultural relations, as we

saw above with power. But besides the obviousinfluence of money on power and its implica-tion in very practical issues (who applies formoney where, who supports whom, whodecides where and how to spend the money),the relation and attitude to money can varysignificantly and be understood as an elementof cultural differentiation, as well as a sourceof conflict.

Along the same line is the attitude towardspublic grants, including European money: whatis good practice and wise management, what

is opportunism or mismanagement, what is“cheating” and what is wise or clever accoun-ting? How seriously are financial rules takeninto account and how well are books kept? Aninteresting aspect is of course the fact that inEuropean programmes the rules apply to every-one in the same way, and the procedures tendto be similar for everyone (even though this hassomewhat changed as a result of decentralisa-tion of programmes such as Youth for Europe).

Culture and youth work ethics

Professional ethics and principles are also ano-thereasy ground for astonishment and conflictamong colleagues and partners, and one thatmost often remains unspoken. As usual, thedifferences are noticed when they have alreadymade a negative impression.

Who is to take the involvement of participants“seriously”? What is the role and behaviour of the youth leader and youth worker towardsthe young people? Is it acceptable to drinkalcohol? Who is to exercise responsibility andto act in a responsible way? To what extent doyouth workers know the restrictions and obli-gations imposed on their collegaues abroad?Who is a good and modern youth worker andwho is not?

23

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Ethics

Power Time

Money Communication


youth projects



1.9 What to do?

As explained above, our intention in this brief chapter is to outline some of the challenges thatcarriers and managers of youth projects arelikely to meet when venturing into internatio-nal co-operation. The principles and methods of developing intercultural learning with youngpeople in a youth exchange are covered byanother publication. Also, chapter 3 providesadvice on working in multicultural teams.

Still, in view of the challenges outlined above,it is useful to take into account some basicprinciples or ground rules for intercultural co-operation.

Accept insecurity and ambiguity

It is normal that a relative uncertainty or con-fusion of norms exists. Bear in mind that yourpartners may be feeling the same way. Nomatter how hard you try, there will always besurprises and events you may only compre-hend later.

It could be culture...

... or not! Try to refrain from interpreting theattitudes of others according to the stereotypesthat you have learned and acquired about peo-ple from the same nationality or background.In particular, try to manage the tendencyto look for confirmation of the stereotypes.

Probably your partner is really acting accor-ding to the stereotypes! But it is also possiblethat it is not the case. Remember: stereotypesare usually a very partial and very simplifiedimage of reality. So far as possible, try to under-stand the behaviour of your partner as theyare. Let them make the connections to theirculture, instead of you. They may be in a bet-ter position to know and they probably willnot feel offended, or will not feel the urge todefend themselves if it comes from them.As a way of preparing yourself and your col-leagues, try to read something about the coun-

try or culture you are going to be in contactwith, if possible by someone from that cul-ture. It may help. Before going, take time to

think – maybe together with the young peo-ple and/or with your colleagues – of the pre- judices that you may have received or heardabout those people. Recalling them may helpyou and your friends to realise that they areprejudices, even though you may always findpeople who can make the prejudice seemright (if you try hard enough, you will!).

Put yourself in the other person’ s shoes... or skin!

A rather daring recommendation, we agree.But whether you are visiting or being visited,try to imagine how you would feel if you werein the other person’s position (e.g. with a li-mited understanding of the language, probablyinsecure and feeling uncomfortable about thefood or the weather, anxious about the deve-lopment of the project, dependant on otherpeople, etc.). This attempt at empathy may helpunderstand how the other is feeling and maketheir attitudes more understandable.

Be clear about your limits and the conditions you are subject to...

You are in a better position to negotiate – andto be understood in your requests – if youknow for yourself the conditions – or the results– that are essential for your project and yourorganisation. Similarly, if you know what yourprinciples or values are you may explain themand their raison d’être better. Usually peopleare sensitive and experienced enough to respectand help you meet conditions that may havebeen imposed upon you, if you explain them.This also requires from you some effort to dis-

tinguish what is really important from what isan accessory or, what is related simply to yourway of doing things (remember: there are alwaysalternatives!).

... and remind yourself that what youwant to say will probably never beunderstood in the way you meant it.

We tend to forget that it is nearly a miracle thatwe manage to understand each other acrossborders. When there is a common language

the illusion that we understand each other ismuch bigger, and the illusion may be greaterif one of the partners happens to use their

24

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit

Recommendationsfor intercultural

co-operation



mother tongue. Remember: only you knowwhat you actually mean! We can expect thatour partners hear and understand exactly thatmost of the time, but be ready for it not to bethat way. And even when you understand andare understood, the practical consequences of that are very different (people have differentways of interpreting things and doing things).

There is more than one way of doing things!

There are always different ways to pursue thesame objectives, just as there is not one methodfor doing things. Of course, “our” way is still thebest and most normal (for us), but others willprobably disagree (they also have their bestand normal way). Consider your own ethno-centrism when implicitly or explictly evalua-ting other peoples attitudes and work

Discuss/negotiate ground rules...and evaluate them

Especially if you have had previous experiences

with intercultural projects, it may prove use-ful to discuss and possibly agree among thepartners on basic ground rules for communi-cation or for dealing with the programme orthe young people. The actual rules definedmay actually not be very important, but thediscussion provides a golden opportunity tobring into the open possible different approa-chesand sensitivities to certain issues. The exis-tence of some rules also provides an opportu-nity to address sensitive issues through theevaluation of their implementation, with part-ners and with participants. But one should avoid

becoming a slave of the rules; as suggested,the rules are a medium – for communicationand negotiation – and not just a set of normsto be applied blindly.

Trust!

Especially when engaging in international orEuropean co-operation projects, a high degreeof trust and confidence between the partnersis essential. This must be differentiated fromcandid or romantic attitudes of naïvety: one

also has to have a minimum of assertivenessto understand what might go wrong and todiscuss it with the partners and colleagues. But

the richness of the experience, and the rich-ness of culture, is based on the impossibilityto predict everything. So, some trust in thepartners, in the young people, ought alwaysto be there. Without this trust and the corres-ponding recognition of equality of dignity(and of cultural competence) the risk is thatthe attitudes reflect the biases and insecuri-ties there at the start and that the spiral of self-fulfilling prophecies is engaged. When indoubt, do consider that hospitality is one of the most commonly spread and importantvalues of human communities (Europe inclu-

ded!); therefore the chances that your hostsare doing their best and that your guestsunderstand your efforts are very high.

Tolerance!...

In the absence of a better expression, we haveto use tolerance to mean the need to some-times accept things as they come. See first, tryto understand, and only after react. Not every-thing is foreseeable and, on the other hand, itis legtimate to expect that partners are doing

their best. Even when that best is not goodenough for our own standards. As a friend of ours put it 3, tolerance only makes sense if itis painful, if it is hard – otherwise, what’s thevalue in being tolerant? Intercultural learningis a very rewarding process and experience, butit can also be hard.

... and frankness.

Intercultural learning has to be based on theability of those participating in the process toanalyse it and to discuss it, including the con-flictual issues, in a meta-communication orevaluation process. Apart from the obviouslearning process that this entails, this con-frontation of feelings and experiences is ne-cessary to clarify the atmosphere and to get ridof mutual frustrations and resentments thatmay have accumulated. Without moments likethis, very common in conflict managementsituations, there are chances that the co-opera-tion will not continue or that the assumptionsand misunderstandings will prevail in thefuture.

25

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit


co-operation

3 BERGERET, Jean-Marie, quoted in “Navigare Necesse est”.



Get the best out of it!

Despite everything that has been said, inter-cultural learning is a lot of fun! Although it canand must also be pursued at home – wheremulticultural settings also exist and are pro-bably as interesting as any group of youngpeople abroad – the fact is that both for theyoung people and for the youth worker veryfew things can replace the excitment of tra-velling and being faced with difference, novel-ty, sometimes the exotic, and in some waysthe feeling of being a foreigner, a visitor or atourist (anonymous, free, etc). So instead of

facing it as a headache or as a problem, changeattitude and take it with ease and with fun!Not everything can be settled in advance and,frankly, it is sometimes the small incidentsthat make the experience a memorable one,for leaders and for project participants alike.

Get trained!

One thing that is very true regarding intercul-tural learning experiences is that, especiallywhen abroad, youth workers often go throughthe same experience as the participants. Butyouth workers and project managers in par-ticular also have the possibility of being trainedfor it. In fact one of the main objectives of theEuropean youth programmes and policies is toprovide training on intercultural learning toyouth workers and to young people in gene-ral. The knowledge, skills and attitudes forintercultural work can be learnt, developed

and improved. In order to get the best out of our efforts – because no-one is born know-ing everything – and in order to make betterprojects.So remember, a European Youth project is morethan just a successful application form…

1

ProjectManagement

T-Kit


co-operation

1 Youth Work

Documents

Transcript of 1 Youth Work