- Conflict between traditional UNDP projected approach and new Portfolio Approach is difficult to navigate. Although they can operate simultaneously it still is a challenge to articulate 2 modalities of work within the same CO and find ways to look at complementarity instead of friction. - CO's need to apply new approaches and leverage integrated collective intelligence to find alternative ways to mobilize resources for Portfolio approaches. In our local context, donors and partners are not highly interested to finance a learning and experimental systemic approach. Also, there are more innovative international donors and partners that operate in specific  - UNDP traditional recruitment profiles might have difficulties to engage in these new systemic approaches. New types of roles, functions and profiles are needed to match the approach (partnerships, data, learning, systems etc..) - Although the Deep Demonstrations are focused on a new programmatic offer, it is vital to work on key organizational elements in order to be in a position to implement and operationalize a portfolio. Our CO has realized the need to work on defining new frameworks, pathways and modalities for internal office structure (form and function), monitoring evaluation and learning (MEL), and resource mobilization and partnerships engagement. - Although there are ways to track the progress of projects within the CO, these are very limited in capturing learning. UNDP monitoring and evaluation mechanisms and reporting exercises are heavily rigid, focused on targets and log frames leaving insufficient space for capturing learning. This is an issue when trying to work in an integrated manner within units. Information lies with the people and not the organization and there are no mechanisms to share the information. It takes alternative mechanisms such as sensemaking, collective intelligence, informal conversations, participatory dynamics to be able to capture the information needed. This would allow to work better together, plan more efficiently, optimize human and financial resources and try to reach more systemic effects and results.

- Limited availability of skills and capacity within the CO to engage with the approach. Low prioritization of portfolio design work by program and project managers due to workload with implementation of regular projects. Some level of resistance and low adaptation from CO colleagues due to the innovative nature of the process. - Full engagement from CO units in designing projects and proposals that build on and align with the Portfolio, instead of generating new project ideas from scratch or based on direct demands coming from their usual partners. - Full engagement from CO units in sharing information about ongoing projects, specially related to lessons learned and key insights to inform the portfolio design and dynamic management process. - Limited availability of donors and potential finance partners who are willing to invest in more systemic, experimental and learning centered approaches

We needed to rely on collective intelligence and participatory exercises to extract relevant insights from all units regarding internal structure organization and partners and donors. We needed to map potential stakeholders and donors, aligned with our 6 areas of interest and options of the portfolio, and create their profiles with data regarding their ongoing initiatives and common objectives to be able to design the engagement plans. So we had to work with our CO core team using collective intelligence, we had informal conversations with key stakeholders and we did a literature review of country program documents and strategies as well as other media articles.

We organized a Country office Portfolio Retreat where we discussed with the CO program staff: partnerships and resource mobilization approaches, internal structure for portfolio management and MEL (monitoring evaluation and learning). In this retreat we used image association exercises, problem space mapping, role-playing activities and other. We did weekly design sprints with the CO portfolio core team, leveraging collective intelligence and co-creation. We used these sprints to map the stakeholders and design engagement plans based on the data out their areas of focus, their needs, our needs and common interests. We developed a pitch deck template featuring the key messages and data about the portfolio on FoW and our call to action to e used in the partnership and resource mobilization meetings.

We did not work with any at this stage, since this was a more internal organizational stage.

We did not work with any at this stage, since this was a more internal organizational stage.

We did not work with any at this stage, since this was a more internal organizational stage. 

We did not work with any at this stage, since this was a more internal organizational stage.

We did not work with any at this stage, since this was a more internal organizational stage.

We have engaged with FAO in informal conversations and visits as we are hoping to engage them in the implementation of some portfolio options.

Collective intelligence and co-creation, together with different forms of data generate insights that are the basis for a more informed and targeted strategy and planning for stakeholder engagement and mobilization.

N/A