Week 4: Collaboration and sustainability

Archived English Discussions Collaboration
#21

Hello @Olusina

For sure you have the zeal to work and I appreciate your participation in this discussion. Are you aware that community radio is a great platform for exposure? When you put enough effort on your work and use the skills learnt from sharing with others, your program will improve and someone might notice you out there. I have seen people move from community radio to public broadcasters and private radio stations and even move to government communication departments.

I will leave this for people in your region, maybe they can share some opportunities with you.

2 Likes
#22

Olusina Motiasan from Ejulene93. 7fm.thank you Busi I know for sure that you are there to give me my required answer to whatever question I ask I pray if I will have the opportunity to see or meet you people physically

1 Like
#23

Bonjour, chers collĂšgues, une collaboration durable, fructueuse, est une collaboration gagnante dans les deux sens :
Une radio communautaire à besoin de produire des contenus pour les auditeurs et par les auditeurs, avec l’affirmation des services techniques. Aujourd’hui, nos radios communautaires ont besoin des ressources et les organisations ou bailleurs ont besoin de la voix des radios.
Ainsi, une bonne collaboration est basĂ© sur la confiance et la difinitions des besoins des deux parties. Parler franchement, car quand les radios pensent que l’autre doit donner de l’argent, le travail est Ă  moitiĂ© basĂ© sur l’intĂ©rĂȘt des promoteurs de radios qui pensent faire du profit. Certes sans profit, pas de radio, mais serier les prioritĂ©s, nous permettrait de choisir les collaborateurs. Donc, il peut y avoir des collaborations sans financement (argent).
Pourquoi ne pas essayer de doter les mĂ©dias de mĂ©dias, d’autonomie en Ă©nergie solaire et en contre partie ces radios diffusent des programmes des partenaires qui d’ailleurs intĂ©ressent les auditeurs.

#24

2019duwani not everybody understand this international language you are communicating with and I want to believe you have something tangible for us.Olusina Motiasan

#25

@Olusina don’t worry about it, we have same discussion in French. @2019duwani should be on the french side, our moderator is already in touch with him.

#26

Olusina Motiasan from Ejulenen93.7fm igbodigo,okitipupa,ondo state, Nigeria. I want our resource persons to share with us simple and easy method to sustain collaboration between broadcaster and stakeholders without fund

#27

@Yakubu. Great point here.

#28

@rehema. I have seen this happening. You want funding to continue and you promote practices that do not help your audience. It makes the radio station lose listnership.

#29

Here is my response to this week’s discussion.

We had two questions to guide us.

  • Does all collaboration between radio broadcasters and stakeholders require funding? Why? Or why not?
  • How can collaboration between radio broadcasters and stakeholders be sustainable? Please provide examples of long-lasting collaboration you’ve been involved in related to radio programs.

On the first question, I will say YES. All collaboration between radio broadcasters and stake holders require funding. Here I am taking it that the producers of radio programmes are what we refer to as radio broadcasters and stakeholders are the radio station, farmers and other organizations. Even if I take the radio station as a radio broadcaster, I still see every collaboration as requiring funding.

Lets take a simple example of a radio programme producer who produces farmer programmes and has an agreement (Not written and signed MOU) with a radio station, farmers and other organization to do this. In this arrangement, no one pays money but they are all committed that the radio programme is produced and broadcast. Are we going to say this collaboration does not or is not involving money? I think no. There is money involved in here. The committed producer is likely spending his own money on communication with the stake holder and possibly the stake holders are also spending on communication. There is also like that people travel in this arrangement. It can be either producer going to the stake holders or stake holders coming to the station and transport money is likely to be involved. The airtime the radio station provides also is somehow money. I think what confuses us is when we think of direct exchange of money and huge monies like for salaries, allowances etc. Then we see collaboration in which these do not occur as collaboration without funding.

Coming to the second question, I think collaboration between radio broadcasters and stakeholders can be sustainable if the parties involved are committed. It is commitment that will make the parties involved discuss challenges (Which might be funds) and find solutions.

The long standing collaboration I have been involved in is in the production and broadcast of a farmer programme called “Farming is a Business” on Breeze FM. In this programme, the collaboration is between me (As a radio broadcaster), Breeze FM (As a radio station) and Provincial Agriculture Office (As a stake holder). This collaboration has been there from the year 2004. Breeze FM has committed itself to continually allocate airtime for the programme. I the presenter has committed myself to ensure I produce the weekly programme with relevant, upto date and timely information. The agriculture office helps me find resource persons which can be farmers, extension officers, NGO staff etc). This is what you may call a no funding collaboration but I do spend my money to communicate, sometimes Breeze FM comes in also. The agriculture office also sometimes comes in with transport. So we all spend and it is not a no money collaboration but no one is bound to spend. However, others have been coming in and these they sign with the radio station an MOU which at those times, we say we have other collaborators and these come with funding making work easier.

Let me stop here. Nakamba maningi (Local language meaning I have spoken too much.)

1 Like
#30

Radio and broadcasters exist to: bring the bare facts and issues affecting society, inform, educate, disseminate and communicate so as to transform lives, people or society.
In achieving their core mandate radio broadcasters and their respective stations need to co-exist and collaborate with varied interest groups and stakeholders with various agenda and interest of why they exist.
To achieve a sustained collaboration the parties ( radio broadcasters and stakeholders)

  • must have an agreed aim or goal set from the beginning
  • outline the road map to achieving the goal
  • conduct SWOT analysis of each other so as to leverage and complement each other
  • identify the resources needed and how to marshal it
  • have clear cut roles and responsibilities for each party and individuals
  • set up dispute and conflict resolution in the execution of the agreement
  • establish sustainability strategies and the worst situation an exit strategy for each collaboration,
    I quite remember my interest and passion for radio agriculture extension started with a collaboration between Trade Aid Integrated and the Municipal Agriculture Development Unit of the Bolgatanga Municipal Assembly to execute a Climate Smart Agriculture project in the Municipality.
    The project adopted capacity for agriculture extension officers, field visits to farm families in communities and use of radio. I remember Farm Radio International was responsible for the radio aspect of the project.
    Farm Radio International provided skill training for the radio station staff and the agriculture extension officers for out station and in studio radio broadcast of Climate Smart Agriculture.
    Several years after the project have exited, the radio station and the department of agriculture are still involved in providing agriculture extension through radio to farmers and other radio station have adopted the approach of getting agriculture to provide education to farmers in the region.
#31

@MartinMwape

I see you point and you have made it clear for everyone. There is indirect involvement of funds as you put it, to make things happen but not to say that the radio station is getting a certain amount from the partnership or stakeholders are getting something. Both parties indirectly commit to the expenses involved in making sure the collaboration becomes a success.

In moving forward, when we talk about funding and collaboration we need to be specific on what kind of funds are we talking about. At the end of the day when calculating costs one needs to cover everything and possibly the radio station can recover sponsors for the program and advertisers during that slot. You know it gets easier to sell airtime when you know your content is up to standard. That I believe will assist in sustaining the collaboration that has no direct exchange of money.

#32

Good day,Olusina Motiasan from Ejulenen93.7fm igbodigo,okitipupa,ondo state, Nigeria.A programmer,producer,presenter,reporter and a newscaster.good relationship,trust and nice program can enhance good collaboration between radio broadcasters and stakeholders even make their relations last longer.For example one I involved in is when we had an interview programs with farmers I personally paid them visit,I produced jingle for them in their language s,I run their promo severally.

1 Like
#33

I am adding a voice to Rehema’s point here. Whether it takes too long a collaboration, time will come and the collaboration will come to an end. So to sustain your work at the station or for the radio to have continuity and survival, you always need to be strategic -to have alternatives and as many collaborators and supporters as possible. Resources are never enough so the need to look ahead and have a follow-back position.

1 Like
#34

Additionally to this point Busi,

My brother Martin Mwape, reason we are discussing by saying; in collaboration you have to benefit from each other or you accept to bare a big price than your collaborator. But where again one benefits more than the other, I suggest fresh discussions should take place. Imagine where you just accept a collaboration and you exchange a cow for just a hen, or the kind of Barter Trade where you give a tin of beans for just a hen! It may not be worth it. It becomes worthy when you both accepted (this is the agreement). You bare more than the other yet you accepted it. But if you realized it needed discussing and making fresh arrangements, better to do it not to lose much.

1 Like
#35

Week 4: How to make collaboration last.

Q1.Does all collaboration between radio broadcasters and stakeholders require funding?

  • YES, but not in all circumstances.
    Why? Because collaboration like most of us gave our understanding in week one, it was inevitable to maneuver the word BENEFITS or 50/50 between both parties. The truth is, manner shall never fall again from Heaven, besides nowadays there is no free launch. Thus, the saying: No food for lazy man. Everybody must work hard to earn either a wage, stipend (motivation), salary, commission or compensation.
    Due to how the terms mighty be; say, who is to do what, when, where, and how? as both parties collaborate in the task they wish to accomplish. It is at this boundary that the broadcasters and stakeholders must consult themselves with a free mind to either put in place a good memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or not. Which would depend if the collaboration would be a short-term agreement or a long-term agreement.

In fact, funds which is the plural form of financial resources is the inertia of collaboration after the idea have been reasoned out to be helpful for the development of the community first, before the individuals behind the idea.
I progress by saying, in private-public collaboration where radio broadcasters and stakeholders are inclusive in such type or kind of collaboration, funding can’t be left out in the future even though one of them might decide to come in as a volunteer. If we check collaboration carefully how it often operates at various levels, one is often having the funds to sponsor and the other, the technical skills required to forge ahead, to archive the desired goal.

Q2. How can collaboration between radio broadcasters and stakeholders be sustainable?

I think before any activities are started, a MoU should be signed between the radio broadcaster in charge of the process and stakeholder, to have an explicit document which best explains the terms. For example;

  • A section on data ownership: the MoU should explicitly give full ownership of the data to the partner in charge of the process. The stakeholder should explicitly agree not to use the data he will have access to in its own commercial interest or to share it with third parties without the consent of the broadcaster.

  • Data reuse by the technical partner(s) should follow the same rules and processes as all other data sharing agreement between the organization in charge of the farmers’ data and third parties interested in accessing and using the data.

  • The technical partner should explicitly commit to raise awareness and train those of its staff assigned to the project on the sensitivity of personal information, and the need for complete confidentiality.
    Sometimes the technical partner is aware of the administrative procedures that are required in the country. The MoU may therefore assign the execution of the official declaration to the technical partner, on behalf of the organization in charge of the data.
    Everything being equal, if the terms are fully respected, the set goals in collaboration would be achieve and this would help sustain collaboration.

4 Likes
#36

Olusina Motiasan from Ejulenen93.7fm igbodigo,okitipupa,ondo state, Nigeria. Mikepac715 you have said it all about what can sustain collaboration between broadcaster and stakeholders but in some cases some of our stakeholders are not literate to the level of signing mou in fact some of them we have to convince and canvass before they can relate with us I was even planing to provide small transistor radio for our stakeholders that is farmers so whenever farmers radio program is on air they can listen to us but due to financial constraints we were unable to do that. So to sustain collaboration between broadcaster and stakeholders is it good to embark on verbal agreement

2 Likes
#37

Local media plays a very important role in information dissemination for the benefit of the local population. The world over, local media seems to do better than mainstream. As such, it is important for broadcasters, particularly the local ones, to create collaboration with different stakeholders. These collaborations vary from country to country. However it is important to maintain them because the locals get to hear the much needed information from the relevant stakeholders. Since media is referred to as the third pillar of state, it should inform the masses accurately about any issue that may be pertinent. The collaborations between broadcasters and different stakeholders are a necessity.

2 Likes
#38

I have since 2013 involved in radio discussion on agricultural issues with radio stations mostly FM and recently on a free to air television program since 2018. We often take a topic and discuss it and have live phone ins for both the radio and television. At we take on government policies and programs all to ensure farmers and the general public are well informed to take action and opportunities they might not be aware of.
As stated in the first week, I work with the Department of Agriculture of the Northern Regional Coordinating Council in Tamale under the Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. I have been with the department since 2004.
I have have seen the challenges the department of agriculture faces with reaching out to faces due to:

  • inadequate Agriculture Extension Agent (AEA) in the system because of non recruitment and replacement of staff who retire or pass on.
  • Inadequate resource and funds
    The situation resulted in higher farmer to AEA ratio, with 1 AEA : 7500 farmers or even more in some district departments of agriculture. However the recommended ratio by FAO is 1 AEA: 500 farmers. You can see the huge shortfall/gap.
    This where radio can come in to assist in getting agriculture technologies disseminated to farmers as the waves reaches several kilometers and remote areas. Hence a fertile ground to collaborate.
    The gap in AEA to farmer ratio is an opportunity to discuss collaboration with the departments of agriculture in your respective areas.
    More often, the department of agriculture wish to contact radio but are afraid of cost and do nothing about it. I believe radio broadcasters could take the initiative and the agriculture departments and staff might respond. In this way collaboration could be established and sustained for a very long time.
    However, I also notice some agriculture staff shy away from radio broadcasters because, they could be misrepresented by information they give us some are always interested in NEGATIVE news or information,. This makes the officers not willing to appear on radio discussion . A solution and assurance on this could result in officers willing to appear in studio to discuss smallholder farmer issues, challenges and opportunities.
    Collaboration could be established with/without monies involved in this situation and could be sustained for very long time so far as farmers continue to exist.
#39

Wow! To added more light on your point. Many people often laught those without funds to progress as, mouth can say, but hands can’t do because of lack of financial resources (funding).

I have seen many good ideas melt and vanish away in the thin air because, funding was absent, and the stakeholder gave a very difficult condition of 20:80 instead of 50:50 as we basically defined collaboration in week 1.

1 Like
#40

Its possible Olusina to di verbal agreement when there are constrains but remember its risky. We know integrity has always been questioned when one is not sure.

  • I think if verbal agreement is to be held firm, then a third party should often be consulted as witness between broadcaster and stakeholder based on wieght of the agreement.
1 Like