(Photo courtesy of Dalberg Global Development Advisors)
“I thought it was just going to be so boring,” said one young man as he contemplated joining a Manhood 2.0 program in Pittsburgh. But after six weeks of in-person group sessions, he had changed his mind: “I guess I should say like that taught me how to be more mature and we talked about females a lot in there like how to treat them and stuff. And that taught me like a lot.”
He’s not alone. Our experience in multiple countries finds that these types of sessions can have a meaningful impact when they are conducted in-person. But how can we achieve the same impact when sessions are delivered virtually?
Manhood 2.0 is a space for teenage boys and young men (ages 15-24) to reflect on the impacts of what they’ve been taught about what it means “to be a man.” Developed from Promundo’s international program, with the University of Pittsburgh, it engages young men in critical reflections about manhood—and the dimensions of power within it—to improve sexual health, to prevent dating violence, sexual assault, and LGBTQ bullying, and to build healthier relationships. During a series of in-person sessions, participants slowly build up trust, beginning to share more and more deep, personal experiences. Many past participants report that it’s the first time they’ve been asked to directly talk about relationship dynamics, and that they value, in particular, the space to question ideas about what it means to be a man.
The space is critical. And while it’s always a challenge to make online training and workshops as effective as in-person sessions, these challenges are particularly acute when dealing with subjects as deeply personal and provocative as gender, racial bias, and/or violence and sexual harassment (as well as when working with underserved and under-resourced participants). And as providers have necessarily switched from in-person to remote sessions during the pandemic, the challenges have become even clearer.
Best practices have begun to emerge. For one thing, we’ve learned that centering participants throughout the design process—from choosing a delivery platform to structuring content—can make it possible to build conducive virtual spaces for tackling sensitive issues, rather than pale imitations of in-person engagements. And there are crucial nuances to getting it right. Running a virtual session of any kind requires setting clear objectives for the session, assigning a facilitator beforehand, getting everyone on video where possible, providing opportunities for participation every 2-3 minutes, and meeting in smaller groups or breakout rooms. Facilitators should be aware of time management, keep sessions to under 90 minutes, offer health breaks, and always test the technology beforehand.
However, we must accept that there is no “copy and paste” formula for taking in-person trainings online. Achieving impact requires creative approaches. Specifically, it requires a deeper understanding of participants’ needs and more thoughtful work to make sure the content and format of the training truly engages their attention, speaks to their concerns, and is responsive and flexible.
Along with drawing from Promundo’s own experience, we spoke with program designers, trainers, and evaluators at leading organizations that work on sensitive topics—including those from Girl Effect, InclusionVentures, and YLabs—to learn how they’ve adapted their offerings for remote delivery and what their recommendations are for adjusting to the reality of COVID-19. Drawing on best practices and insights from interviews with four leading organizations, we’ve broken virtual program design for sensitive topics into five essential steps that put participants at the center and allow the session to achieve its transformative potential:
- Ensure your mode of delivery is accessible and inclusive,
- Build trust and community with the group,
- Understand the ethics of remote facilitation and disclosure,
- Use participant-driven content design, and
- Develop feedback loops for evaluation and iteration.
Ensure Delivery Technology Is Accessible and Inclusive
Shifting content online can increase barriers to entry for some participants, particularly underserved or under-resourced populations. One way to select the best delivery mechanism is by sending out a survey before the session to assess what type of technology or devices your audience has access to (computers, smart or feature phones) and whether their data or internet connection is strong enough for a video call. Some of Promundo’s partners recommend selecting platforms that are compatible with phones and that do not sap large amounts of data. It may be necessary to read the agenda and describe visual content to ensure those phoning in are not left out, while closed captioning services can automate transcription.
Participants may vary in their familiarity with digital tools, so start by walking participants through the ways in which they can engage (e.g. chat box, emojis, muting and unmuting the microphone, etc.) to ensure that all participants feel prepared to engage. Clearly demonstrating the use of different functions can be pivotal to achieving an effective session when the content is personal or provocative, as Amy Lazarus, the former CEO of InclusionVentures, told us, recounting a difficult Zoom funeral at which some of the elderly attendees did not know how to mute themselves.
When designing remote workshops, the aim should be to remove barriers to joining. Laura Baringer of YLabs’ CyberRwanda Project underscores that facilitators must be asking themselves: “What is the cost to the user? Does the digital requirement of our platform mean that those most in need of our content are not going to get it? How will they access it safely?” The medium of delivery determines how and if participants engage with the content and should be carefully chosen in the design process as a result.
Build Trust and Community With the Group
The ability to build trust and community with the group is a key determinant of success for training programs on sensitive topics, both remote and in-person, since success often depends upon the openness and trust of participants. Shifting to virtual engagement on personal subjects like gender, race, power, and violence requires additional efforts to establish trust in a group. Amy Lazarus advises creating “brave zones” where participants can be “engaged but not defensive,” and establishing group norms of “taking space and giving space” as early as possible.
When hosting trainings online, another prerequisite for building trust in the group is assuring privacy and confidence for participants and facilitators. Allowing participants to define community guidelines at the beginning of the session can be one way to navigate this, granting them agency for boundary-setting from the outset. Lindsey Evans of Girl Effect notes that transparency builds trust, too, and advises facilitators to be clear about how the program will use participant data. This attention to data protection should extend to platform selection as well: If the program makes use of online tools like a message board, for example, it is important to seek out media providers who offer the safest way to share information.
Providing multiple different ways for participants to engage—from speaking to typing in the chat box to giving feedback via anonymous forums—enables attendees to share in the way that is most comfortable for them. As with in-person engagements, individuals who are systemically marginalized and oppressed tend to participate less frequently, and inequities can be further amplified by technology if not mitigated thoughtfully. For example, the same issues and inequities women in in-person engagements are still factors online. It is the facilitator’s job to be mindful of such dynamics within the group and correct for them when structuring the session.
Smaller groups may be necessary for online sessions than for in-person ones. Groups of four to six people have been shown to be the most effective, allowing participants to get to know each other better and contribute more freely, potentially making it easier to establish shared norms and build trust. When working with a larger group, the use of breakout rooms and discussion in pairs can help encourage participation on personal topics where attendees may be reluctant to share with the whole group.
Understand the Ethics of Remote Facilitation and Disclosure
Leading remote trainings opens opportunities to reach those in different geographic areas, which can provide both opportunities and risks. Make sure you research national mandatory reporting regulations to inform disclosure and safeguarding before your session.
YLabs, which leads remote training and codesign sessions with youth teams in India, Ethiopia, and Kenya stressed the importance of considering the safeguarding and ethical implications of virtual sessions when planning an event. “Will attendees have access to a private space and device to participate? Does your team have a protocol to delete identifiable information from their phones after a remote session? These are things you have to consider from the beginning,” said Baringer. Raising Voices in Uganda also recommends conducting trainings on violence against women (VAW) reporting protocols, as it is well-documented that gender-based violence cases have risen under lockdown. This kind of training may help facilitators to identify and refer participants who feel unsafe, or are experiencing violence at home.
Use Participant-Driven Content Design
Keeping participants at the center of the design process is essential for remote training programs and workshops on sensitive topics, and will help to safeguard against risk to participants. Evans of Girl Effect notes that it is also important the target audience have opportunities to feedback to voice any questions, concerns, and ultimately shape decisions and the design of the program itself. Both Evans of Girl Effect and Baringer of YLabs stress that programs, in particular those with sensitive content, should always be co-designed with their audience and key stakeholders and be in line with local dialogue on the individual and community levels. They recommend ensuring trained local experts facilitate sessions in order to more effectively tackle difficult subjects. For example, in developing the Portal for Gender Equality in Schools (PEGE) in Brazil, an online platform for distance learning for public school educators, Promundo learned that involving local teachers in designing educational activities was essential to the sustainability of school-based interventions. When programs are designed and performed by external professionals, they often end when the “outsiders” leave and may overlook issues which would be obvious to those engaged with the content on a daily basis. The same could be true at the end of a remote program designed and delivered by outside organizations.
Develop Feedback Loops for Evaluation and Iteration
Part of keeping participants at the center of the programmatic design process on sensitive topics is providing them with mechanisms for evaluation, both during and after the session. Throughout the engagement, eliciting verbal or written feedback from participants is important to gauge mood, reactions, and desired pace of the group. Post-engagement feedback is vital to determine which activities and content resonated the most (and least) with participants. It may be helpful to include a pre-evaluation and post-evaluation survey to measure the impact and perception shift of participants as a result of the program. Participant feedback is crucial in our quest to craft impactful remote engagements on sensitive topics, and while we face an exciting opportunity to innovate on delivery, the types and effectiveness of technology for promoting shifts in power dynamics is an important area for future research.
What Is Success?
Success for remote programming may look very different from success for in-person engagements, and we need more evaluation, particularly when it comes to shifts in gender norms, reductions in violence, and other key metrics to fully understand the potential and limitations of these approaches. Technology has allowed us to remain connected while in lockdown, share knowledge in new and creative ways, and reach audiences we’ve never before accessed while also reducing travel and implementation costs. But with the large-scale adoption of remote delivery in the pandemic, we can and must capitalize on these opportunities to unlock the full transformative potential of remote learning on topics of power and violence, building on their potential, unique advantages rather than replicating the limitations of in-person engagement. By deploying intentional design and centering participants from end-to-end, remote training programs and workshops can become powerful new tools for fostering understanding on the most difficult issues of today and forging a path for long-term impact and positive change.
The authors would like to acknowledge and thank Sitara Pal and Patrick Toure from Dalberg, and Jane Kato-Wallace and Ché Nembhard (former Promundo-US staff), as well as Tolu Lawrence, Clara Alemann, and Gary Barker of Promundo-US for their contributions to the research, writing, and framing of this article.
Support SSIR’s coverage of cross-sector solutions to global challenges.
Help us further the reach of innovative ideas. Donate today.
Read more stories by Alexa Hassink & Joe Dougherty.