Trust in the Leader of Collaborative Process Design and Facilitation
SKILL SK-14 | Coordination & Case Management
Coordination Awareness
Understanding how different institutions interact in a project context: where mandates overlap, where gaps exist, who has authority over what, and how to align actors without having formal authority over any of them.
How to Develop It
1. Mandate mapping
With your project team, produce a one-page map of institutional mandates: who regulates what, who has community engagement obligations, who receives grievances, who has authority over land and resources. Identify gaps explicitly.
2. Gap analysis workshop
Convene a small meeting with representatives of each relevant institution. Present the mandate map and ask: where are the gaps? Who covers this when no one is assigned? Document agreed responses to each gap.
3. Coordination protocol drafting
Based on the mandate map and gap analysis, draft a brief coordination protocol: who communicates what to whom, through what channel, and how often. Circulate and agree before the next project phase begins.
Why This Skill Matters
Many SE-GRM breakdowns occur not because individual actors failed but because gaps between institutions were not managed. When no one owns coordination, concerns fall between agencies and communities are left without a clear responsible actor.
Observable Behaviors
+ Maintains a current map of which institution is responsible for which concern type
+ Proactively identifies institutional gaps before they become community-facing problems
+ Establishes communication channels between institutions before coordination is urgently needed
+ Escalates inter-institutional gaps rather than working around them
+ Does not leave communities in the middle of institutional disputes about who is responsible
Self-Assessment
Read each Reflective Question below and honestly consider how consistently you demonstrate this in your actual fieldwork, not how you think you should behave, but how you do behave. Then assign a score from 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest):
(1) Not yet developed: Rarely demonstrated in practice
(2) Emerging: Demonstrated sometimes, but inconsistently or only under favorable conditions
(3) Established: Demonstrated reliably in most situations, including moderately challenging ones
(4) Adaptive: Demonstrated reliably even in high-pressure situations, and practitioner actively helps
Common Gaps & Pitfalls
! Assuming that coordination will happen naturally once actors are identified
! Treating coordination as a one-time setup task rather than an ongoing practice
! Leaving communities to navigate institutional confusion on their own
Connections
Related Tool
Governance Gap Mapper
Multi-Actor Messaging Matrix
Land & Permit Status Dashboard
Reflective Questions Score from 1 (lowest) to 4 (highest):
I maintain a current map of institutional mandates and responsibilities for the project area
I proactively identify coordination gaps before they become community-facing problems
I have established direct communication channels with focal persons at each relevant institution
When coordination gaps emerge, I escalate them rather than working around them
Th shared to the public for free courtesy of the
THE CONFLICT RESOLUTION GROUP FOUNDATION
www.coregroup.org.ph * info@coregroup.org.ph
in partnership with SustainABILITIES Lab
© Pixelhaze 2024. A Hostinger Website Builder Template by Pixelhaze Studio
This toolkit is provided for general guidance and informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal, technical, or professional advice. While efforts have been made to ensure accuracy and relevance, users are encouraged to exercise their own judgment and consult appropriate experts when necessary. The developers of this toolkit assume no liability for any decisions or actions taken based on its use.