Description
Institutional networks can be useful for sharing knowledge, leveraging resources, and creating a supportive group to develop strategies. One example is the Southern African Network of Higher Educational Institutions Challenging Sexual Harassment and Sexual Violence (NETSH). In 1997, NETSH was formally developed, with a mission “…to contribute to the elimination of sexual harassment and sexual violence in all Southern African institutions of education. The Network’s initial focus [was] on the elimination of sexual harassment and sexual violence in tertiary education.” From 1997–2002, NETSH collaboratively developed programs addressing sexual harassment and sexual violence on university campuses, including holding a conference in Harare, Zimbabwe in 2000; conducting local workshops and resource reviews; and designing and disseminating a handbook. Several of the universities that participated in the network developed sexual harassment policies, grievance procedures, and other interventions.
NETSH operated at three levels. First, individuals rather than institutions affiliated with NETSH. This was because it would have been difficult to obtain agreement from executive levels of all represented institutions, which also were at different stages of implementation; moreover, institutional-level affiliation would change the nature of the network’s activities. Individuals were selected based on their access to resources, understanding of the issues, available time and energy, and status in the community. Second, a coordinating committee with at least one person from every represented country participated in NETSH; the coordinating committee held many meetings, workshops, and conferences and engaged in resource dissemination, fundraising, and networking. Third, a secretariat managed funds while the coordinating committee led the strategic implementation of NETSH activities. Regular in-person meetings kept communications effective and efficient. Although the African Gender Institute served as secretariat, all universities in the collaborative network implemented individual practices in their institutions.
Implementation lessons learned
Successful implementation of an institutional network requires resources and high-level commitment. Structurally, the different parties responsible for managing funds vs. managing NETSH activities presented coordination and efficiency challenges, causing administrative burden and delays in communications and approval of funds. In addition, members often had too large of a workload, as NETSH activities were in addition to their primary jobs. For example, some members dealt with local dynamics when organizing conferences within their own institutions and then had to deal with different dynamics at the regional level with NETSH.
Additional information: PDF