needed and they would be interested in participating in the
course. The workgroup jointly developed a basic format as well
as preliminary topics for the course. USIP’s Civ-Mil team built
upon that work to develop and refine the c ourse with assistance
from subsequent working groups. We then tested several portions of the new course at the 2016 PSOTEW.
Intended Audience
While the material presented in the course will improve the
skills practitioners need to operate effectively, another major
benefit will accrue from the active and mutual learning among
participants from across the peacebuilding spectrum. Getting
the correct balance of civilian and military, and governmental
and non-governmental participants will be essential to the success of the course.
The appropriate professional level of participants is also important. Many courses are offered for senior mission leaders and entry-level professionals; middle management is often overlooked
in civ-mil relations training. Therefore, the USIP civ-mil team
crafted a course directed at a mid-level actors with a cross-sector
focus, which presents a challenge due to the wide range of years
and experience for mid-level peacebuilders.
This year’s working group was composed of a mix of around 25
civilian and military personnel that included participants from
the Department of State, Department of Defense, USAID,
NGOs and academia. Each individual had relevant experience
as a practitioner and/or as an educator. The group provided
helpful feedback for sections of the course for final development.
Methodology / Structure
Using the inputs from the 2015 PSOTEW working group,
USIP Civ-Mil team organized a new course around four following modules: Environment, Actors, Communication and
Leadership. A variety of teaching methods, including speakers,
facilitated discussions, small group work, and exercises, as well
as required readings will be used to enhance learning on these
critical themes.
discussion on communication and information sharing mechanisms. The second day continued the communications block,
and addressed different types and purposes of communication,
including active listening techniques. The session on leadership
discussed leadership criteria within an organization and the
limits on transferability to an interorganizational setting. The
condensed preview was sufficient to all the attendees to provide
valuable feedback on the proposed content and delivery. Particularly helpful was feedback that disproved some assumptions
regarding content and base level of knowledge of the target
audience.
One assumption that proved incorrect was that mid-level practitioners would have a common baseline knowledge of certain
civ-mil topics. Follow on discussions helped the Civ-Mil team
incorporate material to fill the identified gaps. Additionally,
it allowed the civ-mil team to tailor the list of materials to be
included in the course’s required readings list.
Other important feedback from the participants was that
in some cases the application of the content needed further
refinement, with greater emphasis on case studies and scenarios, confirming the Civ-Mil team’s intent to rely heavily on case
studies. In addition, participants provided useful suggestion on
cases. The group agreed that threading one or two cases, other
than Afghanistan or Iraq, throughout the course would be most
effective.
The USIP civ-mil team is continuing to refine the new course.
As a collaborative process, the team will continue to reach out
to partners to finalize the structure and content of the course.
Ultimately, USIP aims to pilot “Dealing Effectively with Uncertainty: Civ-Mil Relations in Shared Spaces” on July 11-15,
2016 at USIP’s headquarters in Washington, DC. For further
engagement opportunities or to share comments or thoughts,
please contact Jim Ruf at [email protected].
Work Group Outcomes
The PSOTEW working group focused on portions of two of
the course’s modules: communication and leadership. We began
the session with an overview of the full course structure, noting
that the modules will build on each other. The first two modules (Environment and Actors) were not previewed due to time
constraints. The first session on communication was a facilitated
23