Many health leaders are highly analytical, adaptive learners who thrive on solving complex problems in dynamic, real-world contexts. Their expertise is grounded in years of field experience, where they have honed their ability to rapidly generate insights, test ideas, and innovate solutions in collaboration with diverse stakeholders. In January 2021, as countries were beginning to introduce new COVID-19 vaccines, Kate O’Brien, who leads WHO’s immunization efforts, connected global learning to local action: “For COVID-19 vaccines […] there are just too many lessons that are being learned, especially according to different vaccine platforms, different communities of prioritization that need to be vaccinated. So [everyone] has got to be able to scale, has got to be able to deal with complexity, has got to be able to do personal, local innovation to actually overcome the challenges.” In an Insights Live session with the Geneva Learning Foundation in 2022, she made a compelling …
What is the difference between a wicked problem and a grand challenge?
The management concepts of wicked problems and grand challenges are closely related but have some key distinctions: Similarities Both wicked problems and grand challenges refer to complex, systemic issues that are difficult to solve and have far-reaching societal impacts. They share several characteristics: Distinctions While closely related, there are some nuanced differences: Scope and framing Solution approach Origin and usage Relationship Many scholars view grand challenges as a subset or reframing of wicked problems. Grand challenges can be seen as large-scale wicked problems that have been formulated into more actionable goals. The grand challenges framing aims to mobilize collaborative efforts to make progress on wicked problems, even if they cannot be fully solved. Both concepts highlight the need for: Understanding both wicked problems and grand challenges can help managers and policymakers develop more effective approaches to complex societal issues. The grand challenges framing, in particular, may help motivate action and …
Can analysis and critical thinking be taught online in the humanitarian context?
This is my presentation at the First International Forum on Humanitarian Online Training (IFHOLT) organized by the University of Geneva on 12 June 2015. I describe some early findings from research and practice that aim to go beyond “click-through” e-learning that stops at knowledge transmission. Such transmissive approaches replicate traditional training methods prevalent in the humanitarian context, but are both ineffective and irrelevant when it comes to teaching and learning the critical thinking skills that are needed to operate in volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous environments faced by humanitarian teams. Nor can such approaches foster collaborative leadership and team work. Most people recognize this, but then invoke blended learning as the solution. Is it that – or is it just a cop-out to avoid deeper questioning and enquiry of our models for teaching and learning in the humanitarian (and development) space? If not, what is the alternative? This is what I explore in just under twenty …
Experience and blended learning: two heads of the humanitarian training chimera
Experience is the best teacher, we say. This is a testament to our lack of applicable quality standards for training and its professionalization, our inability to act on what has consequently become the fairly empty mantra of 70-20-10, and the blinders that keep the economics (low-volume, high-cost face-to-face training with no measurable outcomes pays the bills of many humanitarian workers, and per diem feeds many trainees…) of humanitarian education out of the picture.
The Design of a Learning System to Teach Analysis and Critical Thinking for Humanitarians
My presentation at the First International Forum on Humanitarian Online Training (IFHOLT) hosted by the University of Geneva on 12 June 2015. A more detailed version of this presentation is available here.