Alliance Name thread

To: The "Naming" Group

Rafael, James, Patrick (and Sue by submitted comment) - As the naming sub-group we met this morning to discuss the Alliance name. We also had input through the New York meeting in June, the original draft implementation plan, the prior discussions within the review and planning group and the contributions to the online thread at this link.

We agreed to extend the consultation process about the name. As this is such an important issue the opinion of the sub-group was that we need to test some possible Alliance names with some of the people who could be possible partners, stakeholders and (though I hate this word!) targets for the work that the Alliance will undertake. Members of the group are going to identify 10 people with whom we will engage concerning the name.

Below as promised is the draft text of the possible note to those people for their input on the name issue. These are the four preferred names for each of the people on the sub-group where they did not agree with any other names being suggested by their colleagues. Please let me know any suggested edits.

***

DRAFT note to 10 people who will be asked to provide their feedback on the best name for the Alliance. People still to be identified by the naming group (please see above).

Dear (name),

Working with a number of development organisations we are engaged in a concerted effort to develop a global alliance that will seek to increase the scale, efficiency, effectiveness and policy engagement of a range of closely related development strategies and action including, for example, community participation, entertainment-education, social marketing, facilitating dialogue and debate, behaviour change, communication for development, social change, media for development, health promotion, social networking and others. There are tens of thousands of development initiatives working through those strategic lines across the full spectrum of development priorities and contexts.     

One major issue we face is the name for this global alliance. On that issue we would very much welcome your feedback and input. Before outlining the specific options we are presenting for your guidance these are some of the parameters within which we are seeking to work.
 

The name needs to:

- Work across all development issues;

- Contain key strategic elements (and hence strong identification points) for the sub-groups in this field of work (for example the ones outlined in the opening para above);

- Be outcome related - what we are working together to achieve;

- Have a high degree of intuitive understanding and relevance on "first sight" by people not familiar with this field of work; and

- Enhance the positioning of this field of work relative development policy debates and dialogue.

From your perspective, experience, role and understanding of Development which of the following names would you endorse and why?

Global Alliance for Engaged Social Change

Global Alliance for Informed and Engaged Societies

Global Alliance for Social Change

Global Alliance for Engagement and Change

Other? - please feel free to suggest an alternative name

Thanks - your input and guidance on this matter is hugely important.

Rafael Obregon and Warren Feek (or others sign?)

***

The above is the suggested draft that we send to the 10 agreed people. We would then engage them in person to obtain their perspectives and views. 

Warren

Sue, Rafael, James, Patrick - Hi - well... we need to try and resolve the name of this Alliance! Can we please hold a final decision-making meeting on this coming Tuesday, 121st November at 9am EST? (Due to daylight saving changes please check this time against your time zone). This is the one hour before the Summit Secretariat meeting for those involved in both. Only one agenda item - what will be the name of the Alliance? 

PS - Call in numbers to follow

For our discussion tomorrow or Wednesday (I am compiling your “what time” responses and will get back to you very soon - still waiting on 2 people) I thought that a background note outlining, from past discussions including at the New York meeting, some of the dynamics to take into account when deciding the name of the Global Alliance may be helpful.

Getting to a name is not an easy task. (Stating the obvious!) But it is a really important task for all the reasons we know so well - positioning related to our field, resonance with policy makers, communicating of added value to development, bonding the various strands of our field of work, and others.

So, this is my reminder of a few key things that ahve emerged in this process that we need to take into account as we seek to decide a name for the Alliance. Please correct or add of course. There could be important items that I have missed.   

1. The name needs to resonate across the major development issues - for example, economic development; governance and democracy; environment, including climate change; equity;  gender; health; education; HIV/AIDS; rights; poverty; justice; infrastructure; freedom of expression; cities; etc. Perhaps the best way to quickly review what the name needs to relate to and resonate with is to match proposed names for the Alliance against the SDGs and ask the quesiton - does this name make sense related to that SDG?

2. One purpose of the “Global Alliance …” initiative is to bring this field of work together in order to take effective action on our commonly shared agenda.  Therefore, it will be really important that the name chosen does not by design or implication appear to favour or endorse one element of our field over others. If you just take the different names used by the orgs involved in the Review group for this Alliance this demonstrates the issue - for example, Media Action (BBC Media Action), Social and Behaviour Change (USAID - noting that they recently dropped Communication from SBCC), Communication for Development (UNICEF), Social Marketing (ISMA), Social Justice (Soul City) Community health (CORE), Media and Communication (IAMCR), Communication Programs (JHUCCP). That is just a few. There is a significant variety. If one view of this field looks favoured in the name then we will potentially lose other important elements of this field of work from our endeavours. This will undermine our very purpose for creating the Alliance.

3. That same dynamic applies in relation to the present networks, partnerships, major programmes and/or associations that are generally considered to be important parts of our overall field of work. The name of the “Global Alliance …” has to ensure that a platform is provided that, through its very name, draws those elements into a more coherent and substantive process. The name has to create that space and provide the foundation for that to happen. This will not take place if the name adopted either overly identifies with one part of this field of work and/or appears similar to an existing network, partnership, major programme or association. 

4. Another key purpose of the “Global Alliance …” is to present and argue for the body of work, strategic analysis and policy proposals and ideas for this field of work to governments and other local, national or international policy makers and funders. So the name adopted has to facilitate that goal. The name itself has to help make both the argument for what we are seeing to “progress” in development, and resonate with the interests of the constituencies with whom we engage. Essentially we want to be able to say, through the name, that “you” (policy maker, community, funder, etc) should really do much more of “this” (what we want them to do, fund, expand, use as the basis for policies, etc. The name should both provide direction towards and open the space for that “this” to take place.

Hope that this helps. Please add.

Thanks - Warren      

To: The Alliance "name" sub-group - Rafael, James, Patrick and Sue - cc others as an FYI.

Hi folks - look forward to chatting at 9am EST Wednesday. Many thanks to those who have been flexible in order to accommodate the commitments of others, ensurign the full subgroup can meet.

The background note can be accessed here along with the thread of comments and ideas.

The dial in numbers are at this link.

 A quick heads-up. To start the meeting I am going to ask everyone to provide the name you prefer and recommend. No ifs, no buts , no maybes, no perhaps, no "or", no "on the one hand" or "the other hand". Just state your preferred name - actual wording.

We can them move forward from there.

Thanks - much appreciated - look forward to chatting at 9am EST Wednesday 21st.

Hi folks and thanks for engaging this morning. A really difficult task and we are making progress.

1. The Alliance names proposed by everyone in the round-robin were:

Sue - Communication Alliance for Social Change - building informed and engaged societies

Rafael - Communication Alliance for Social and Behaviour Change - building informed and engaged societies

Patrick - Global Alliance for Social and Behaviour Change

James - Development Alliance for Informed and Engaged Societies - Putting people at the heart of the development agenda

Warren - Global Alliance for Informed and Engaged Societies - communication, media and social change for effective and equitable development action

Carla: Alliance for engagement, social and behaviour change

2. We agreed to put Sue and James's proposed names forward for decision by the Baltimore meeting. 

So, the names to be put forward in Baltimore are:

Communication Alliance for Social Change - building informed and engaged societies

Development Alliance for Informed and Engaged Societies - Putting people at the heart of the development agenda

3. Process

a. One person will succinctly present the argument for each option

b. Discussion

c. If necessary a vote

Thanks - Warren