The Paradoxes of Programme Development

Leadership Blogs - by Dr. Kavita Ghosh, Head- Design (Progams)- Development Consortium

Not every challenge in programme development has a solution. Some are paradoxes we learn to navigate. How do we balance long-term change with short-term expectations?How do we design for local contexts while thinking about scale?How do we make ideas simple without losing their rigour?In this edition of DC Leadership blogs, Kavita, Head of Programme design, reflects on three paradoxes that have shaped her journey in programme design and content development and why navigating these tensions is as important as solving problems.

In the social development sector, we often talk about strategies, policies, and data. These things are crucial, of course, and they form the backbone of our work. But what I have learned from my years in this field and from my colleagues is that the most impactful work often lies in navigating a series of fascinating and sometimes frustrating paradoxes. 

These are not problems to be solved but rather tensions we must constantly manage. While our specific roles define what kind of push and pull we face daily, in my work of conceptualising programs and developing content, I have found myself facing a few paradoxes time and again. Let me try to articulate what these have been and what I have and have not been able to do.

The Paradox of Long-Term Gain and Short-Term Impact

We are always under pressure to show quick wins and immediate results to demonstrate success and secure funding. However, I have often worked on programs that focus on deep, foundational themes like intrinsic motivation and well-being, which take time to show meaningful impact. The challenge with such focus areas is that the results are not immediately visible (vis a vis a program focusing on say library or STEM lab set up), so what becomes important is to have metrics that carefully chart out the success indicators for the program. At the same time, it becomes crucial to present the overall progress pathways to the donors and collaborators for their clarity. And at times, all of that still may not work because what’s expected by the end of the grant cycle is still something very ambitious and something not doable when we talk about change in mindsets and behaviours. 

The Paradox of Contextualization  and Scalability

How do we design programs that cater to local needs but are still scalable? While we always conduct thorough needs assessments, our designs are guided by core frameworks so that the entire intervention is bound together by a strong set of ideas. Some time ago I read this and it kind of stayed with me that one size may not fit all, but four might fit forty. This basically suggests that even in scaling we can keep the essence of contextualisation by having some well defined iterations.   And of course, beyond this, we are always talking about scaling of numbers vis a vis scaling of the idea and I have found merit in both. 

The Paradox of Simplicity and Losing the Rigor

This is a tension I face often: how do we maintain rigor while making our content understandable and relatable? When we move from program design to creating things like modules or video lessons, it's a constant challenge. My go-to strategy is to keep specific "personas" in mind. For me, it helps to vividly imagine if a resource would be useful to a BRC coordinator in a rural area or a teacher in a school serving a marginalised community. It's about finding that sweet spot where a resource is simple enough to be used but rigorous enough to be truly impactful. 

These are just a few of the challenges that define the work of program development. I would love to hear from you. What are some paradoxes you have encountered in your own professional journey?