The Contribution of Public Relations Roles and Activities in Building and Maintaining Successful Multi-Sector Partnershi...

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0043031/00001

Material Information

Title: The Contribution of Public Relations Roles and Activities in Building and Maintaining Successful Multi-Sector Partnerships for Social Change A Case Study in Romania
Physical Description: 1 online resource (206 p.)
Language: english
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011


Subjects / Keywords: CASE -- MULTI -- PUBLIC -- SOCIAL
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Mass Communication thesis, M.A.M.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation


Abstract: A global, fast-changing world requires of public relations a more holistic approach than most theories have so far provided. This paper aims at illustrating the social role of public relations through its endeavors in building and maintaining multi-sector partnerships for social change. It does so in two steps. First, a multi-disciplinary literature review on multi-sector partnerships is distilled in nine propositions explaining the contribution of public relations roles and activities to building and maintaining effective multi-sector partnerships. Second, the resulting propositions are discussed in light of a case study of an educational multi-sector partnership from Romania. Finally, it is concluded that eight out of nine propositions were supported by the case, which is indicative of a considerable role of public relations in the multi-sector collaborative practice. Further research is suggested to continue testing the proposed propositions, with the ultimate purpose of theoretical grounding.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by ANDREEA L SAVU.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Molleda, Juan Carlos.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0043031:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0043031/00001

Material Information

Title: The Contribution of Public Relations Roles and Activities in Building and Maintaining Successful Multi-Sector Partnerships for Social Change A Case Study in Romania
Physical Description: 1 online resource (206 p.)
Language: english
Publisher: University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011


Subjects / Keywords: CASE -- MULTI -- PUBLIC -- SOCIAL
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre: Mass Communication thesis, M.A.M.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation


Abstract: A global, fast-changing world requires of public relations a more holistic approach than most theories have so far provided. This paper aims at illustrating the social role of public relations through its endeavors in building and maintaining multi-sector partnerships for social change. It does so in two steps. First, a multi-disciplinary literature review on multi-sector partnerships is distilled in nine propositions explaining the contribution of public relations roles and activities to building and maintaining effective multi-sector partnerships. Second, the resulting propositions are discussed in light of a case study of an educational multi-sector partnership from Romania. Finally, it is concluded that eight out of nine propositions were supported by the case, which is indicative of a considerable role of public relations in the multi-sector collaborative practice. Further research is suggested to continue testing the proposed propositions, with the ultimate purpose of theoretical grounding.
General Note: In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note: Includes vita.
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description: Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description: This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility: by ANDREEA L SAVU.
Thesis: Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local: Adviser: Molleda, Juan Carlos.

Record Information

Source Institution: UFRGP
Rights Management: Applicable rights reserved.
Classification: lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID: UFE0043031:00001

This item has the following downloads:

Full Text




2 2011 Andreea L aura Savu


3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I thank my chair, Dr. Juan Carlos Molle da for his continuous mentoring and advice and for his time flexibility, even within short deadlines. I also th a nk the members of my supervisory committee for their support and suggestions. I especially thank Dr. Kathleen Kelly for her thorough proofread ing, which was extremely helpful to me. I appreciate the time and availability of my interview participants, along with their honest and open contribution to my research; I also thank them for their patience, especially as it was at times hard to keep phon e connection s in Romania uninterrupted for up to one hour. I thank my parents for their unconditional long distance support. I especially thank my boyfriend who encouraged and motivated me every day during my most stressful times, when I had to divide myse lf between a time consuming research, a demanding teaching assistantship, and graduate courses. Last, but not least, I thank all of my friends here at the University of Florida for all the inspiring conversations that motivated me in my research, and beyon d.


4 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 7 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 8 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 10 Tackling Development A Historical Appro ach ................................ ...................... 10 A Fairly New, Global Enveloping Trend: Multi Sector Partnerships for Social Change ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 13 Public Relations: A Social Role ................................ ................................ ............... 15 Building and Maintaining Multi Sector Partnerships for Social Change: A Theoretical Niche for Public Relations ................................ ................................ 17 The Case Study ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 18 The Romanian Educational System ................................ ................................ 18 ................................ .... 20 Romanian Public Relations Background ................................ ................................ 22 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ .......................... 24 Multi Sector Partnerships: Conceptual Approaches ................................ ............... 26 Multi Sector Partnerships Structure ................................ ................................ ........ 28 Members in Multi Sector Partnerships ................................ ............................. 29 The Relationship Structure in Multi Sector Partnerships ................................ .. 34 Antecedent Structural Arrangements ................................ ............................... 37 The Role of Strategic Participatory Communication in the Structure of a Multi Sector Part nership: Implications for Public Relations ........................... 38 Multi Sector Partnerships Processes ................................ ................................ ...... 41 Communication Instruments in Multi Sector Partnerships ................................ 42 Discursive Productions in Multi Sector Partnerships ................................ ........ 44 R elational Processes in Multi Sector Partnerships ................................ ........... 47 The Role of Strategic Participatory Communication in the Processes of a Multi Sector Partnership: Implications for Public Relations ........................... 48 Outcomes of Multi Sector Partnerships. Implications for Public Relations .............. 51 Research Questions ................................ ................................ ............................... 55


5 3 METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 57 Respondent Selection ................................ ................................ ............................. 60 Respondent Description ................................ ................................ .......................... 60 Data Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 61 Questionnaire Construction ................................ ................................ .................... 61 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 63 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 63 4 FINDINGS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 66 RQ1: What Was the Structure of the Multi ................................ ................................ 67 Members and Participation ................................ ................................ ............... 67 Relationship Structure ................................ ................................ ...................... 73 Antecedent Structural Arrangements ................................ ............................... 77 RQ2: What Were the Specific Processes of the Multi Sector Partnership For ................................ ............... 78 Communication Instruments ................................ ................................ ............. 78 Relational Process ................................ ................................ ........................... 78 Discursive Productions ................................ ................................ ..................... 83 RQ3: What Were the Outcomes of the Multi ................................ ................................ 87 Social Problem Resolution ................................ ................................ ............... 87 ................................ ................................ ............................ 89 5 DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 93 Proposition 1: Through the Practice of Participatory Strategic Communication, the Public Relations Professional Actively Enables "the Voice" of the Beneficiary Within the Partnership. ................................ ................................ ...... 93 Proposition 2: Through Relationship Management Expertise, the Public Relations Professional Ensures a Symmetrical Distribution of Power Within the Partnership. ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 94 Proposition 3: Through the Specific Boundary Spanning Role and the Relationship Management Activity, the Public Relations Professional Is Likely to Be a Suitable Lea der For a Successful Multi Sector Partnership. ................... 95 Proposition 4: Through Its Institutionalized Expertise on Boundary Spanning and Relationship Management, a Public Relations Agency Would Be a Suitable Antecedent Structural Arrangement for a Multi Sector Partnership for Social Change. ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 97 Proposition 5: Through Expertise as Communication Technicians, the Public Relations Professional Can Ensure a Consistent, Clear and Organized Communication Flow Among All the Members of a Multi Sector Partnership for Social C hange. ................................ ................................ ............................... 98


6 Proposition 6: Through Employment of Discursive Practices and Framing Activities, the Public Relations Practitioner Con tributes to the Establishment of a Common Definition of the Problem and to the Formulation of Clear Objectives, While Taking Into Consideration Individual Goals. ............................ 99 Proposition 7: Through Their Relationship Management Expertise, Public Relations Strategies Can Help Build Trust, Commitment, and Ensure a Climate of Sharing and Open Dialogue Within a Multi Sector Partnership. ....... 100 Proposition 8: Public Relations Research and Evaluation Helps Establish the Quality of the Public Goods Achieved Through Collaborative Ac tivity, Which, the Success of a Multi Sector Partnership for Social Change. .......................... 102 Benefits for Each Partner Involved, Through Effective Communication of the ................................ 104 Final Conclusions ................................ ................................ ................................ 104 Future Research ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 107 APPENDIX A INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRES ................................ ................................ ......... 108 B INTERVIEWS ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 114 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 199 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 206


7 LIST OF TABLES Table page 1 1 Propositions linking public relations roles and activities to factors ...................... 56


8 LIST OF FIGURES Figur e page 1 1 The three level framework of multi sector partnerships for social change analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 25


9 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Mass Communication THE CONTRIBUTION OF PUBLIC RELATIONS ROLES AND ACTIVITIES IN BUILDING AND MAINTAINING SUCCESSFUL MULTI SECTOR PA RTNERSHIPS FOR SOCIAL CHANGE: A CASE STUDY IN ROMANIA By Andreea Laura Savu May 2011 Chair: Juan Carlos Molleda Major: Mass Communication A global, fast changing world requires of public relations a more holistic approach than most theories have so fa r provided. This paper aims at illustrating the social role o f public relations through its endeavors in building and maintaining multi sector p artnerships for social change. I t does so in two steps. First, a multi disciplinary literature review on multi sector partnerships is distilled in nine propositions explaining the contribution of public relations roles and activities to building and maintaining effective multi sector partnerships. Second, the resulting propositions are discussed in light of a case study of an educat ional multi sector partnership from Romania. Finally, it is concluded that eight out of nine propositions were supported by the case, which is indicative of a considerable role of public relations in the multi sector collaborative practic e. Further research is suggested to continue testing the proposed propositions, with the ultimate purpose of theoretical grounding.


10 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION One of the biggest challenges to development worldwide is th e increased complexity of social issue s. The amount of resources needed in order to address these issues makes it difficult, if not impossible, for a single entity be it a governmental agency, a nonprofit or a private organization to handle. On the other hand, disparate, un orchestrated e fforts are bound to achieve more effort and resources waste than anything else. With these in mind, it is easy to explain why multi sector partnerships for social change have gained a top position on the world development agenda, erasing traditional bounda ries between different types of organizations and bringing them together in a concerted action. And this new priority, as will be shown, is with no little consequences on boundary spanner entities, such as the public relations profession. Tackling Developm ent A Historical Approach Cambridge (20 complex, integrated, participatory process, involving stakeholders and beneficiaries and aimed at improving the overall quality of human life throughout improvements in a range of soci al sectors in an and politicians, international agencies, the private sector, nongovernmental (pp. 144 (p. 145). Development strategies have undergone a number of phases since they appeared on the world agenda after World War II, in the late 1940s. The 1950s were altruistic approach of the much needed


11 development assistance as a political tool to influence countries in the context of the Cold War (Snyder, 2002). It was suggested that it was for this reason that th e United States came up with the Marshall Plan, which was implemented throughout Europe and then replicated throughout the world. At this stage, the United States employed the technique called modernization. The efforts, however, did not go further than te sting variations of the original practice. Specifically, the communication effects approach, mass media and modernization appro ach, diffusion of innovations and social marketing, were all essentially grouped under the umbrella of modernization, praising th e role of mass media as an all powerful facilitator of behavioral change and ultimately of economic growth, which was the desired outcome to prove the achievement of success. The United Nations was created at about the same time to prevent war and to coord inate the international response to social issues (Melkote & Steeves, 2001). Referring to the standard application of modernization techniques in the expectations (p. 143). S uccess would not be the consequence of mere replication, with no locally specific considerations. The 1960s were characterized by a considerable number of development campaigns and development activities, but with no desirable remained high, campaigns widened knowledge and resource gaps between the wealthy and poor and men and women, projects ignored and sometimes threatened local cultures, dependency on industrialized nations and multinational corporations was increasing, and e (Snyder, 2002, pp. 458 459).


12 During the next two decades, attempts were made to change strategies and (Jacobson, 1994) in which concepts su ch as understanding and conscientization took over the forceful inoculation of a specific way to perform on the world stage, at least in the theoretical approach. Essentially, the actors were to be encouraged to shape their own unique role in the play to f it their identity. And the once artificial play was to be realistic and consistent to the point of becoming life itself. The respect for cultural diversity, the localization of development, as opposed to global approaches and empowerment through dialogue w ould be the concepts to lie at the heart of the new approach. However, in the late 1980s and beginning of the 1990s, the investments in development projects declined together with the economy of the overly indebted developing nations. 21 st century, the list of pressing development challenges facing projects around the world focus on the following goals designated by the United Nations in the Millennium De velopment Goals back in 2000 eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; achieve universal primary education; promote gender equality and empower women; reduce child mortality; improve maternal health; combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; ensure enviro nmental sustainability; and develop a global partnership There are two important aspects to note at this point: (1) globalization catalyzed the growing complexity of social problems entailing systemic challenges; or as hese challenges are global in scope. They are no longer


13 partnerships for social change is implied to achieve a greater and more sustainable i mpact on development issues. A Fairly New, Global Enveloping Trend: Multi Sector Partnerships for Social Change The Development Newswire recently reported a milestone in U.N. history: For the first time, civil society was represented in the 36th Session of the Committee on World Food Security that took place in late October 2010. According to Miller (2010), as they try to make an unprecedented mark on global f ood security ). Moreover, more engagement with the private sector is put in terms of going beyond cutting checks to multi resources deployment in the form of specific expertise and This increased involvement is not an entirel y new trend. A first formal recognition of the new approaches to tackle complex social problems was the creation in 1998 of the United Nations Office for Partnerships because as U nited N ations Secretar y General Ban Ki ddressing global challeng es requires a collective and concerted effort, involving all actors. Through partnerships and alliances, and by pooling comparative advantages, we increase our chances Consequently, 12 years after its establishment, t he United Nations Office for Partnerships counts about 243 partners: U.N. System partners, foundations, compani es and corporations, government/ aid agencies, international NGOs, and umbrella organizations. This illustrates the novelty of and growing interest in, multi sector


14 partnership initiatives within the last decade. As Nelson (2007) concluded in an article published in the Compact Quarterly : In one of the most comprehensive impact assessments undertaken to date, the World Bank revi ewed its portfolio of approximately 70 global programmes, all of which involve a variety of public, private or civil society participants in their funding, governance, or programme delivery activities. It carried out in depth analysis of 26 of these progra mmes which represented six of these have been in existence for more than 10 years. ( 9) Nelson (2007) also explained that there are different structures and objectives that character ize these initiatives. In some cases, these emerging partnerships constitute a new legal entity with its own governance structure and operations. A proof of this are the now over 20 global public private health partnerships bringing together hundreds of o rganizations to research, fund, and advocate for improved global health outcomes. Nelson included as examples the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization; the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria; and the Global Alliance for Improved N utrition. In other cases, these multi sector partnerships consist of specific programs, projects, or campaigns between an official donor agency, foundation, or corporation and a variety of new players. The model of multi sector partnerships has been succes sfully implemented in Latin America, now considered a leader in partnership building within the developing world, as shown in a Foreign Policy magazine article (Guillamon, 2010). Moreover, increased attention is given to the relational approach to multi se ctor partnerships and to the need for participation of the community whose issues are being addressed through the partnership in order to achieve success and sustainability. This particular emphasis on relationship management and participation bridges the way for public relations and communication management competencies into building and


15 maintaining multi sector partnerships. This is especially important as the effectiveness of partnerships has been associated, among others, with the existence of specializ ed structures within partnering organizations able to enact the role of boundary spanners. According to Nelson (2007): Given the strategic and operational challenges associated with building effective cross sector partnerships and the growth in such partne rships, there is the need for dedicated institutional structures and management systems within major development agencies, government departments, corporations and civil society organizations that have a clear mandate and sufficient resources to act as int ermediaries or focal points between the organization and its potential myriad partners. It is essential that efforts include a focus on engaging and building the capacity of players from developing countries. ( 15) Public Relations: A Social Role From the b road range of definitions of public relations practice, the commonly establishes and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and the publics on Looking at the historical evolution of public relations, J. Grunig and Hunt (1984) identified four models of public relations, each dominating but not limited to a specific historical period in the 20 th century: press agentry, public information, two way asymmetrical, and two way symmetrical. Interestingly, by drawing a parallel between the contextual evolution of public relations and the evolution of development strategies, the trend moved from a heavy mass medi a reliance and universal recipes to a symmetrical, participatory, relationship based approach in which the sense of people and place shapes the strategy and practice. This is not however random, nor is it surprising in a contextual approach.


16 A global, f ast changing world requires of public relations and communication management a more holistic approach than most theories have so far provided. Specifically, the organization focused theoretical perspective is challenged, and a new approach is required to k eep up with the more complex interplays of a globalized setting: the organization as part of society. This change of perspective is widely illustrated by the European School of public relations (Ihlen, van Ruler, & Fredriksson, 2009), the U.S. post modern public relations perspective (Holtzhausen, 2000), as well as the Latin American school of social communications (M olleda, 2001). The macro view of public relations is additionally justified by the fact that, traditionally, sociological theories addressing issues of social change have given communication a crucial role in the process, specifically in building and maintaining communities (Blackshaw, 2010). knowledge as an alternati ve to the mainstream management instrumental approach, together with newer views on post modern public relations that normatively invests the practitioner in the role of social activist. The European school of thought, more than any other, has concertedly inscribed public relations in a social frame. This was even more of a concern in Eastern Europe where, due to the historical dynamics of the 20 th century, society was facing radical change in the early 1990s, woken up after decades of being blindfolded by communist rule. In this context, European scholars have established a social endeavor for the new Western public relations import: to smooth the transition to democracy and to involve and educate the general public into a new form of economy and lifestyle in other words, to build capacity.


17 Building and Maintaining Multi Sector Partnerships for Social Change: A Theoretical Niche for Public Relations Interestingly, this macro perspective on public relations is maybe less exploited in the literature than it is at the crossroads of different, complementary bodies of knowledge, spanning diverse fields of study. As previously noted, the sociological perspective on public relations has been approached within the European, Latin American, and U.S. post modern scho ols of thought that favored a co creational perspective instead of a management instrumental approach, in the process positioning public relations as an important agency for social change. Importantly, in the last decade, public relations competencies have been situated at the core of development and social change strategies in general and of multi sector partnerships for social change in particular. This new niche for public relations is consequential to the fact that multi sector partnerships for s oci al change have become a wide spread subject of academic research, not only in the social and economic development literature, but also in public administration, community development, business and organizational behavior, and leadership literatures. This th riving research of multi sector partnerships for social change is both an indication of the common responsibility that different sectors are thought to have towards society at large, as well as of the weight communication and relationship ma nagement seems to be given in social change efforts. Therefore, building an argument based on multi disciplinary research to illustrate within the public relations literature the role of public relations in tackling systemic social issues appears to be a necessary en deavor. It also works toward breaking the still existing stereotypes about the inherently unethical, capitalist driven public relations practice


18 considered to do little more than contribute towards maintaining the status quo and favoring the powerful in so ciety (Holtzhousen, 2000; Holtzhousen & Voto, 2003). That is prec isely the purpose the author set for this thesis. The theoretical, multi disciplinary argument was re enforced by practical research : a Romanian case study that illustrate s how public relatio ns expertise contribute s to establishing and maintaining an effective multi sector partnership for social change. The Case Study year old educational program in Romania, the initiat ive of a partnership between a foundati on two tob acco companies with operations i n the Romanian market and the Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sports, with the approval of the Romanian President. Before introducing the case, this section summarizes the functioning principles of the Romanian educational system, to put the The Romanian Educational System A coherent post communist educational policy was established in 1995, after a period of deconstruction and stabilization from 1989 to 1993. I t was modi fied several times unti l the present time, but the basic principles remain ed the same. According to the Law on Education adopted in 1995, the Romanian educational system is regulated by the Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sports. Each educatio nal level has its ow n organization and is subject to current legislation. Kindergarten is optional bet ween 3 and 6 years of age. F ormal schooling starts at 6 or 7 and is mandatory unti l the tenth grade, or 16 to 17 years of age. The last curriculum reform


19 (Anghel, Balica, Badescu, Boca, Brancoveanu, Ghinea, Hritac, Jigau, Novak, Novak, & Pop, 1999, 23). The authors explained that starting with that year, the national curriculum included: the curriculum for compulsory education; educational framework plans for elementary, middle, and hig h school, documents that establish the curriculum areas, disciplines of study and the necessary time resources to approach them; school programs, framework objectives, examples of learning activities, learning contents, curricular performance standard for each discipline in the educational plan; guidelines, methodological norms, and support materials describing the conditions of application and monitoring of the curricular process. Besides the established compulsory disciplin es, there is a variable number between 25 and 30 % of the total number of disciplines o f optional courses Schools may formulate their own educational offer ings based on the new curriculum. In 2004, the ministry of e ducation launched a new strategy regarding the development of the formal and non formal, or curricular and extra curricular, educational activities. The initiative came from a 2003 recommendation of the European Parliament stating the equivalent status of formal and non formal education from the perspective of its contr ibution to the development of the child personality and to his/ her s ocial integration (Mitulescu & Simache, 2008). The authors contended that through its specific forms, this double sided educational activity is considered by the ministry to permit the tr ansfer and the applicability of the knowledge that students acquire though the education system. Moreov er, it is thought to develop critic al thinking and to stimulate you th responsible decision making.


20 The implementation of these (and other) national polic ies with regards to education at the local level is done through inspectorates. According to the mission specialized unit of the Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Spo rts, being subordinated to the ministry, org anized at county level; and acts towards the implementation of the educational objectives established by the Law on Education in e is specifically in charge of guiding the continuous formation of the teaching and auxiliary personnel; it also elaborates research studies and proposes to the ministry of education a range of experiments and activities reg arding the implementation of pre collegiate educational reform in general, and the policies for the specific disciplines, in particular. Finally, at the school level, each class has an advisor or coordinator who conducts a weekly class called counseling and orientation. This role is usu ally performed by one of the class professors with an extra specialization in counseling and orientation. In addition, the law on Education regulated in 1995 the implementation of the centers for psychological assistance of teachers, students, and parents, which operate in each of the 40 counties of Romania and in Bucharest. In the current activities of the school counselors, as they were refined in 1998, the following aspects are included: instruction on educational theories, psychology, the management and sociology of education; and educational and professional orientation, with the involvement of the responsible factors the family, the school, and the community ( e consiliere, 1) The initiative of an educational program started in 1998 when it was launched


21 and surrounding areas The initiating entity was a partnership between two multinational tobacco companies Philip Morris Romania and British American Tobacco Romania and a Romanian nonprofit founded in 1994 the Foundation for Pluralism whose declared mission is to promo te political, cultural and ethnic pluralism, independent press and market economy It was established, implemented, and developed with the assistance of a Romanian public relations agency, IMAGE Public Relations. The program was designed as part of a gener ic juvenile smoking prevention program required by law of every tobacco company operating on the market. However, the program exceeded its purposes and from the very beginning encompassed a large array of issues that pre adolescents are confronted with, ap art from smoking. The teachers and parents and pre adolescents, with the overall goal of developing the individual autonomy of pre adolescents in a context in which the social contagion and risk exposure become negative influences over their lifestyle and personalities. According to the national curriculum, three curricular cycles are followed: the fundamental acquisition cycle (pre school, first and second grade s ), the develo pment cycle (third and fourth grades), and the observation and orientation cycle (seventh through ninth grades). The program was initially designed for the latter cycle which envisages, among others, the development of independent thinking and of the res p onsibility of integration in positive self image. The name of the program along with the main topics developed speak s of the compliance with this educational cycle.


22 In the ne xt stage, the program was gradually extended to 250 sc hools in eight counties in 2002 to 2003. After five years of implementation as a pilot program with consequently, it was for mally included in the Romanian educational system. Its themes and objectives fit the optional curricula of education for health and civic education, of counseling and orientation, as well as extra curricular activities. Initially, the program was developed for seventh graders and was later extended to eighth graders. Starting in December 2007, a new identity was set for the program along with an extension to the whole middle school cycle. On one hand, the prog ram is guided b y a textbook written by two renowned expert psychologists with coordination by the general inspector for pre collegiate education with the Ministry of Education. It is conceived as a guide for professors, enabling them to approach in an effective manner delicate themes such as youth smoking, alcohol consumption, substance abuse, violence, sexual life, and the different kinds of risk associated with them. The material is also concerned with topics such as family issues, school issues, the generation gap, and interpersonal communication. T he guidance was offered to the professors in an interactive manner, through annual trainings, conducted by the team of psychologists responsible with the editorial content of the textbook. The program continues to be avail able for implementation in all the schools in the curriculum or extra curricular activities. Romanian Public Relations Background This thesis is practically concerned, through the case study approached, with the role of public relations in the development of the Ro manian educational system The


23 author is personally tied to this subject as she was born in communist Romania and witnessed as she grew up the difficulties of the transition to a democratic se tting, and, within it, the evolutions of the educational system Public relations in Romania was brought about in the early 1990s by the multinational companies that entered the newly unveiled market. The challenge for the profession in the former communist block in general, as Lawniczak (2001) suggested was beyond common organization public relationships: public relations was implicitly given the role to manage change and achieve development into a democratic, free market spirit. To dispel the fear and stereotypes about capitalism inoculated by communism, to facilitate the creation of a market economy, and overall to involve a citizenry that had been uninvolved and silenced by communism for half a century were the ma dealt with social change management. characteristic of one troubled historical situati mission itself. Therefore, the scope of this thesis is to illustrate the contribution of public relations roles and activities in social change endeavors, specifically in building and maintaining multi sector partner ships for social change.


24 C HAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Referring to multi sector partnerships, Weber (1998) suggested that the success of some initiatives indicate that different types of organizations can cross the barrier of their individual mindset and p ursue common interests through well designed collaborative institutions and processes. Also, as assessed by Keyton, Ford, and Smith structure for, and the process of ways in which organizations and communities work to This literature review takes a multi disciplinary approach to present a range of factors that enhance the prospects for effective collaboration within mu lti sector partnerships including public administration, community building, leadership, business and organizational behavior, and communication and how they appeal and relate to participatory communication. These specific bodies of literature were pur posively considered for analysis, as they represent the main organizational types involved in a multi sector partnership for social change: public, private, and nonprofit The assessment of these different scholarly points of view adds up to the strength o f the which is to explain the extent and importance of public relations roles and activities in what are considered successful multi sector partnership practices. Otherwise said, the author considered that a multi disciplinary type of theo retical approach would be most logical and valid in a study that deals with multi sector partnerships. A three level framework serves to distill and align the perspectives of this multi disciplinary body of research on the multi sector partnering phenome non, revealing at


25 the same time their communication centric commonalities. Specifically, this section assesses the role that scholars have given to communication in the structure and processes of a multi sector partnership. Moreover, because multi sector p artnerships are generally issue centered, this study will go beyond structure and processes to also look at what part communication plays in the outcomes they achieve, both in terms of problem resolution and in terms of benefits for each member. This three level approach will eventually account for a micro meso and macro perspective on the role of communication in building and maintaining effective multi sector partnerships. Figure 1 1 T hree level framework of multi sector p artnerships for social change analysis After a brief clarification of the terminology used within the study, the literature review is divided into three main sections concerned with the structure, processes, and outcomes of a multi sector partnership for social change. Under the structure section, the supporting literature deals specifically with issues of members, relationships between members, and antecedent structura l arrangements of a partnership. The Multi Sector Partnerships for Social Change Structure Processes Outcomes Members Relationships Structure Ant. Struct. Arrangemen ts Comm. Instruments Discursive Productions Relational Processes Participation Problem Resolution Member s Benefits


26 processes section closely looks at the form of com munications, the content of communication, and the ongoing relational processes within a partnersh ip. Finally, the last section, the outcome discusses the two types of results of a multi sector partnership: s ocial problem resolution and individual benefit s of the organiza tions involved, derived from their member status. All sections summarize the points of view on the specific component of all the different bodies of literature included. Each of the three sections ends with a conclusive subsection about t he implications of the li terature review findings for public relations theory. For conciseness and guidance, these theoretical findings concerning public relations are condensed in the form of propositions which are then used as guidelines in the formulat ion of this cited in support of the suggested implications. Multi Sector Partnerships: Conceptual Approaches The increasing insurgence of the collaborative phenomenon across all sectors of society viewed as the most efficient way to address complex social issues has entailed a wide body of scholarly research on the practice; therefore, a plethora of studies have been published in multiple academic fields with a high concentration in t he last decade to try to account for what exactly determines failure and success of the multi actor collaboration, and what the desirable approaches would be. However, the terminology adopted within diverse bodies of literature (and sometimes even within ubject to interpretations and there appear s to be little agreement w hatsoever. Multi sector, cross conceptualization for different organizations working togethe r t owards solving


27 community issues in the community development literature ( Hemphill, McGreal, Berry, and Watson, 2006), as well as in the organizational behavior and business literature (Le Ber & Branzei, 2009, 2010) and in public relations (Molleda, Mart inez, & Suarez, 2008). 2008) are also found in the business and communication literatures. Key ton et al. in which individuals representing multiple organizations or stakeholders engage when working interdependently to address problems outside the spheres of indi viduals or (Agranoff, 2007; Silvia & McGuire, 2010) as integrated structures involving several actors (or nodes) having multiple linkage s and working on cross boundary, collaborative activities that are functionally based in a specific issue or area. Others studied the O'Leary, Gerard, & Bingham, 2006) in th and potential of efforts to involve citizens and non governmental interest groups in approach was expanded through the conc (Agranoff & McGuire, 2003; O'Leary et al., 2006) to illustrate the efforts of organizations in general (whether for profit, public, or non profit) to engage, toge ther, in complex public problem solving. A number of s tudies in the leadership literature were dedicated to


28 groups and organizations together in semi permanent ways and typically across sector boundaries to remedy complex public problems and achieve the common Terminological barriers aside, it can be deducted that all the above concepts boil down to a comm on definition: A temporary associative practice between entities of different sectors of society to solve a particular social issue that most likely cannot be solved by any one organization independently. As noted in the terminology discussion, the differe nt sectors of society in the context of multi sector partnerships for social change generally refer to the for profit or private sector, the public or governmental sector, and the nonprofit or third sector. While the first two are well established, distinc t categories, the latter is mostly defined through exclusion, as a body of entities that are neither businesses nor government agencies (Kelly, 1998) purpose of consistency and Multi Sector Partnerships Structure The mere definition of multi sector partnerships as previously reviewed is built around their structure, more precisely around their main components individual parts or members and the links or relationships that formally hold them together. This section separately reviews the research to address issues of members, structural relations between members, a nd antecedent structural arrangements that are thought to contribute to effective collaboration and partnering success. The role and contributions of communication and participation will be emphasized accordingly.


29 Members in Multi Sector Partnerships As th e concept itself reveals, and as was shown in the diversity of concept definitions, members in a multi sector partnership are usually public institutions, private organizations, and nonprofit organizations. In this context in which different sectors of so ciety are voluntarily working together having a common vision and the common purpose to address a specific societal or communitarian need (Blackshaw, 2010; Molleda et al., 2008; Provan & Kenis, 2008), there is a main concern that most of the reviewed bodie s of literature voice: the participation of beneficiaries in the formal structure of a multi sector partnership. In the development for social change literature, a modernist top down approach seems to have been the strategy generally used in addressing soc ial issues, with the leading role of economic development experts and an overemphasized role of mass beneficiaries (Cambridge, 2002). However, the end of the 20 th century wit nessed a change of paradigm regarding what is efficient in terms of development and what is not. Therefore, because of the lack of consistent results in treating social issues in the developing world, the leading role of mass communications was put under q uestion, faced a wave of international criticism, and eventually ceded its status in favor of a grassroots approach to social change enactment T he participatory paradigm emerged in which the beneficiaries were empowered to design and implement the social change initiatives, with professional developers adopting the role of facilitators and capacity builders (Melkote & Steeves, 2001). This new paradigm o f participation has further been imported in the multi sector partnership practice to address social iss ues. In the community development literature,


30 Wilson and Charlton (1997) argued for participation in their structural definition of partnerships as being made up of four categories of stakeholders: people or organizations that hold key resources, the benef iciaries of the initiative, those who have a collateral involvement but a well defined interest, and those who consider they have a sector partnerships, Hemphill et a l. (2006) correlated the success of a multi sector partnership with the existence of local participative governance, including a community involvement, Blackshaw (2010) suggested t hat it is achieved through consultation, effectiveness. In the organizational behavior and business literature, Le Ber and Branzei (2010) re defined multi sector part nerships looking through a social lens borrowed from the Marxist, pragmatist, and Frankfurt schools of thought. Therefo re, the authors referred to sector partnership for social change and suggested that it c an only be achievable through the contribution of the expanded on the idea and summarized three levels of beneficiary participation in a multi sector partnership: (1) voice receiving constrain, inappropriately define and/or under leverage the role the target beneficiary making change, and/or expand t he roles the beneficiary could play in value creation based on


31 taking contributions is contingent Otherwise said, there is a continuum between passive and active beneficiary participation in a multi sector partnership, and success is dependent on the standpoint of the beneficiary. It is eq ually important to mention that participation is a much contested topic as it was considered to have both potentially goo d effect, empowerment, or less good effects tyranny (Gaynor, 2010). Little empirical research has been conducted to assess which is th e prevalent situation and in what cases it is bound to occur. Development studies concerned with the concept of participation are found to be normative in nature they draw at tention to the importance of power and discourse, communications and issues of representation and democracy within thes e processes The dark side of participation was also discussed within the selected literatures and, therefore, sh ould be considered when establishing the membership of a multi sector partnership. Blackshaw (2010) differentiated between the rhetoric of collaboration foregrounding community and the crude reality of multi sector partnership work that rarely accounts for a meaningful community involvement. Also, while community participation has been generally thought to increase a multi legitimacy, it has fallen short of fostering grassroots engagement (Bristow, Entwistle, Hines, & Martin, 2009). In summary, participation is generally agreed by the literatures of concern to positively impact multi sector partnerships, the success of which is generally associated


32 with the extent of community involvement. Nonetheless, critical perspectives set the focu s on the pure bureaucracy of the community involvement, with its insufficiencies: Community participation was doubted to genuinely increase grassroots engagement. Some of these structural issues and how they can be addressed for increased efficiency of a m ulti sector partner ship are aspects with which the literature review is concerned next They all point ou t the importance of the individual representatives of the organizations involved in a partnership and specifically emphasize the role of the Studying multi sector partnerships for urban regeneration, Hemphill et al. (2006) suggested that the success of such initiatives is closely correlated not only with the institutional partners chosen to serve on them and the formulation of clear goals, but also with the enactment of a well guided leadership and especially the existence of a rather than a community based organization or a committee type of representa tion. The community leader was considered to be more in touch with the problems of the local disadvantaged groups, and thus capacitated to better (and more sector partnership and to achieve commu nity ownership of a certain project. Overall, the authors set the emphasis, beyond the partnership formal organizational blend, on the individuals involved, their synergistic effects, and the type of leadership to which they individually contribute This t ype of interpersonal interaction is responsible in the end for social capital formation, with social capital defined in terms of the individual benefits individuals derive from their membership in a group (Bourdieu, 1986). This is consistent with B social capital of a group is


33 concentrated and embodied in its representatives or leaders. As far as the characteristics of such a leader, he / she should have strong abilities to communicate openly and honestly and win the r espect and trust of all partners, while representing a team role model. In the leadership literature, Williams (2002) built upon the same idea of the multi concept, and identified a set of competencies associated with this position. The summary of his findings the result of in depth interviews of various partnership managers within a region include the importance of building effective interpersonal relationships, the ability to be an active listener, the ability to communicate in such a way that a shared meaning is established, to show empathy and understanding, the capacity to resolve conflicts, to act creatively, to drive innovation and empowerment, and to build trust. In another le adership study, treating members as equals, freely sharing and exchanging information among network members to build commitment and avoid uncertainty, and creating trust internally, amongst network members, and externally, in relation with the partnershi are associated concluded, this type of leadership within multi sector partnerships for social change, authority. a multi sector partnership for social change, in the communication literature, H eath and Frey (2004) stated that the resources committed to a collaborative action would


34 eventually vary according to who represents the organizational members, since the collaboration itself cannot be enacted otherwise than at an interpersonal level. Sit uating their attention from the individual to the gathering of individuals in a team the expression of the partnership itself Keyton et al. (2008) argued for a meso level communicative model of collaboration, implying that the bulk of collaborative com munication occurs at the team level, in which relationships among individuals are established and acted upon and in which strat egic communication takes place. The next section of this literature review investigates further the relationship structure among the already established membership of a multi sector partnership, which is the second important aspect in discussing the structure of such collaborative practices. The Relationship Structure in Multi Sector Partnerships The relationship structure in multi sector partnerships is closely related to the mode of partnership governance. In the public administration literature, Provan and 30). They argued that even if it defies the essence of cooperative endeavors, multi sector partnerships oriented towards a common goal and sharing a common identity need some form of governance to ensure participation, commitment, conflict resolution, and resources. The authors further identified three types of governance that can apply to multi sector partnerships for social change. In shared governance or participant governed partnerships, all members participate on an equal basis and power in decision making is more or less symmetrically distributed; no organization is representative of the network and there is no formal administrative body. In lead


35 organization governed partnerships, the relationships among members are shaped in the way in which one of the members (usually the most resourceful for the purpose of the partnership) takes the role of coordinator or facilitator of the major partnership activities. The third type of governance, according to Provan and Keni s (2008) is the Network Administrative Organizations (NAO). Governance in this case is exterior to the partnership itself; specifically, a separate administrative entity (an individual, group or organization) is set up with the purpose to govern the partn ership and its activities. The relationships among members are highly centralized in this case, and power is mostly The effectiveness of either one of the three options was thought to mostly depend on the number of partners, with shared governance being more suitable for a small partnership in which face to face participation is possible, while NAO governance is usually preferred in large partnerships (10 to 20 members). In a smaller setting, trust showed up as a crucial factor to achieve effectiveness, along with how partnership relationships are governed. This aspect of maintaining relationships will be approached in more detail in a later part of this review, referring to multi sector partnership processes. Both the communication literature and the community development literature bring up the power issue when touching upon the relational structure of a multi sector nizations with the greatest access distribution of power is subject to change as the partnership advances and individual membership changes in the process (p. 392). Powe r relations were considered to lie at


36 the heart of the multi Blackshaw (2010). Sharing control among partners in a participatory type of governance was found to be difficult because of the knowledge gap: the community representatives might lack understanding of policy creation and implementation mechanisms. Also, the power distribution can hinder success in the case of more centralized governance in which it is often the case that corporate management only pursue community One similar risk identified by the author is that the partnership itself be a creation used to legitimize the preferred action of agencies or corporations, or to enhance an already privileged position (through the exploitation of the resulting social capital). Within the business literature, Arya and Salk (2006) defined multi sector partnerships not in terms of power, but in terms of learning relationships, specifically of earch. The authors drew upon value creation through the establishment and dynamics of relationships between m embers and especially through relationships that entails, as discussed in an earlier secti on, different levels of power ranging from being granted a voice to owning and controlling the initiative. The relationship structure of a multi sector partnership can be compared to the emergence of a personal relationship in which the partners meet, are attracted to one another, decide to date and eventually formalize the relationship, plan for the future, buy


37 d eventually grow old together (Moss Kanter, 1994). Antecedent Structural Arrangements Although Blackshaw (2010) contended that the most effective partnerships are the allow for time and flexibility to achieve an effective collaboration, the structure of a multi sector partnership for social change is many times brokered by what is called an antecedent structural arrangement. The Network Administrative Organization (NOA ) just d purposefully created to ensure centralized governance for a partnership, the bureaucratic procedures, and procedures that regard implementation of activities. In the communicatio n literature, Keyton et al. (2008) reported on the trend for what organizational systems and, thereby, more easily facilitate cross constituency collaborations and provide guidanc These facilitators in the process of building and maintaining multi sector partnerships were mentioned in th e leadership literature as well catalysts wh o can facilitate or enable collaboration (Morse, 2010). Similar to the two types of centralized governance identified by Provan and Kenis (2008), the role of boundary organizations as either formal entities or simply members with additional responsibilit ies has specifically been discussed in terms of characteristics and institutional functions: mediating, convening, translating, coordinating, giving complementary expertise, participation across the boundary, accountability on both


38 sides of the boundary, and the use of boundary objects (Cash, Adger, Berkes, Garden, Lebel, Olsson, Pritchard, & Young, 2006). The Role of Strategic Participatory Communication in the Structur e of a Multi Sector Partnership: Implication s for Public Relations The concept of the meaning suggested by Molleda et al. (2008), which resorted different concepts and perspectives from public relations and communication for development and social change. On one hand, strate efforts that engage key constituencies with the principal goal of identifying and nd, participatory communication is stem for deliberation that provides all partnership members, regardless of their social economic status and cultural idiosyncrasies, with an The structure of a partn ership was discussed earlier in terms of membership (including the importance of the individual representative of an organizational member), relationships among members, and already established, sometimes independent, facilitator organizations. There are s everal relevant aspects concerning the role of public relations and strategic participatory communication in the aforementioned conclusions. was the extent of participation employe d in establishing the structure, which points out to both if the community is involved and how influential its voice actually is or needs to be to ensure collaborative efficiency. Participatory communication in this case is found to set the stage for this open, inclusive mode of deliberation, ensuring a strong voice to


39 the beneficiaries, and therefore playing a crucial role in establishing a representative democracy (Molleda et al., 2008). Moreover, an important part of the discussion on membership in a multi sector partnership was identified to be the individual representing an organization and involved in the partnership team, and his/ her necessary leadership abilities. Most of the capabilities associated with this type of leader relationship building trust building, empathy, understanding, listening abilities, conflict resolution, information sharing, and communication abilities employed towards meaning creation are central to the research addressing the characteristics of the public relations prac titioner (Heath, 2006; Broom, 2009), which is indicative of the central role of public relations training for the leadership enactment of a multi sector partnership. This is also consistent with, and adds to, the post modern perspective on the role of the pub lic relations practitioner, who at least ideall y is called to evolve from being an instrument of capitalist expression to enacting a role of community activist, therefore, addressing larger communitarian / societal issues within an organization, and b ehaving as a change agent (Holtzhousen, 2000; Holtzhousen & Voto, 2003). Furthermore, Molleda and Ferguson (2004) found the social role of the public relations practitioner to be four dimensional, referring to Employee Well Being, Ethics and Social Respons ibility, Community Well Being, and G overnment Harmony Through the enactment of these roles, the public perhaps as a change agent or agent of social transformation eda & Ferguson, 2004, p. 346)


40 The role of public relations from a communitarian perspective has also been stressed by Hallahan (2003), who said that community building can be considered the foundation of public relations and by the European school of tho ught that conceptualizes public relations in terms of its contribution to society as a whole, through that democracy is practiced (Ihlen, 2010). Therefore, the following proposition can be in ferred: Proposition 1: Through the practice of participatory strategic communication, the public relations professional actively enables "the voice" of the beneficiary within the partnership. Furthermore, members are not mere individual entities in a partn ership; rather they are parts of a whole, and the whole the multi sector partnership is designated through relationships, and needs a form of governance (Provan & Kenis, 2008) in order to function towards a specific goal, manage and resolve conflicts, and efficiently use the Drawing on these key points, it can be deducted that a partnership acts as an ad hoc organization which has internal publics the members an d external publics the higher governmental authority and the stakeholders of the partnership in general. Proposition 2: Through relationship management expertise, the public relations practitioner ensures a symmetrical distribution of power within the p artnership communication ability, place so that there can be shared goals, specialization of labor, and coordination of w


41 integrative organizations or partnering structures strategic communication and issues management are seen as core leaders of the organization (p. 235). Furthermore, the structural relationships of this integrative organization in the form of multi sector partnerships with its publics, defined by Broom, Casey, and are managed by the public relations practitioner (Ferguson, 1984; Grunig & Huang, 2000; Ledingham & Bruning, 2000). ncepts referring to the antecedent structural arrangements in the context of multi sector partnership structure, but also concepts traditionally associated with the roles enacted by the public relations practitioner in the communication li terature (Dozier & Broom, 2006); this speaks once more about the implied communication centric approach to the partnership structure establishment. Two new propositions can therefore be formulated. Proposition 3: Through the specifi c boundary spanning role and relationship management activity, the public relations professional is likely to be a suitable leader for a successful multi sector partnership. Proposition 4: Through its institutionalized expertise on boundary spanning and relationship management, a public relations agency would be a suitable antecedent structural arrangement for a multi sector partnership for social change. Multi Sector Partnerships Processes By processes within a multi sector partnership, this thesis means the pragmatic character of issues and inte ractions that influence communication among members. It


42 specifically discusses three sides of this aspect: the instruments through which communication among partners takes place, the discursive productions resulted in the interactions in relation to meanin g creation, and the relational processes management. Failures in the multi sector partnering processes were associated with competing interests, mutual mistrust, incomplete information, and pursuit of individual goals (Page, 2010), all communication relat ed aspects, which is an indicator of the importance of strategic participatory communication in the process level of a multi sector partnership. The specific implications for public relations will be discussed in the conclusions of this section. Comm unicat ion Instruments in Multi S ector Partnerships In the leadership literature, Morse (2010) contended that integrative public leadership (equivalent in its definition to developing multi sector partnerships to create public value) is enacted through structure, process, and people; within the process category, the author mentioned a set of instruments through which the partnership communication takes place, such as workshops, seminars, telephone, or e mail. Crosby and Bryson (2010) drew attention to the design a nd use of forums, arenas, and courts as intrinsic to a partnership process, while Page (2010) referred to such processes as to face dialogues, presentation in larger groups, and virtual forums; he furth er attributed the responsibility of their setting and clarification to the leader of the partnership. In the business literature, Arya and Sark (2006) correlated the success of the multi sector partnerships with the creation and implementation of adequate knowledge structures and channels of communication to insure a constant flow of communication among the members. This is particularly important as it implies that sometimes the


43 process level of the multi sector partnership can lead to changes within indivi dual organizations to accommodate and eventually internalize the new assumed social mission. The relevance of the communication processes is also emphasized as being vital ed (2010) in the public management and community building literature; they mostly referred to the need for consistent, clear and organized communication flows with all sta keholders. Hardy, Lawrence, and Phillips (2006) referred to specifics and said that conversations that can include not only face to face dialogue but also a variety of other di scursive practices, such as memos, letters, e Going one step further, Molleda et al. (2008), in the public relations and communication management literature, strategically differentiated among the communication pro cesses according to the moment in the life of a partnership. After conducting an in depth case study of a Colombian multi sector partnership, the authors concluded that emphasis on direct communication is crucial in the initial settings phases, while contr olled and mediated communications became preferable and more efficient as the partnership was already functioning. They also found that the communication strategies and tactics such as interpersonal or group communication as well as non traditional media had engaged all partners in a participatory manner. More than the actual instruments the form of communication through which communication is enacted among members in a multi sector partnership, the discursive


44 productions the content of communicati on weigh heavily in the effectiveness of the collaborative practice. Discursive Productions in Multi Sector Partnerships related practices of consumption, production, and dis tribution, which bring into being an conversations in which participants draw on and simultaneously produce discursive The discursive appro ach is applied throughout the multi sector partnerships centered literature at different levels: A common definition of the problem at hand is considered one of the challenges of the multi sector approaches to societal issues management (Blockson, 2003), a long with a consensus upon the goals that allow organizational participants to perform better (Provan & Kenis, 2008; Molleda et al., 2008). The way to enable agreement on collaborative goals is through the primary s and how they can be reduced, at least partially, to a common denominator (Page, 2010). Building around the idea of common denominator, in the leadership literature with focus on multi sector partnerships, Crosby and Bryson (2010) argued that the creation and communication of shared meaning may be seen as the primary work of visionary leadership, which Foldy, Goldman, and Ospina (2008) referred to as a transformational Foldy et al. perceived this kind of leadership as key to c ollaboration within a partnership as it enables different members to pursue a common interest. Huxham and Vangen (2000) also associated partnering success to processes


45 Acco rding to Page (2010), this is accomplished through agenda framing or the problem and especially its worth to invest in it. Furthermore, agenda framing was considered most effective when it resulted from joint discussions and mostly worked as a highlighter of the overlapping interests of all the involved partners, rather than just program specifics. Crosby and Bryson (2010) referred to these formal arrangements and their continuous negotiation as a drafting process that is highly participatory, involving stakeholders and implementers, and that is key to the success of a multi sector partne as the processes leaders use to formulate them, will affect the outcomes of the Molleda et al. (2008) argued for an essential role of participator y communication ically discussed the role of communication in the agenda framing and meaning creation in a Colomb ian partnership case study in terms of building alignment which specifically referred to the practice of administrators as to insure the alignment of the collaborative common goals with the individual goals of participating organizations. In addition to that, Bryson and Crosby (2010), in the leadership literature, pointed out that building on distinctive competencies of the different partners contributes to the path towa rds a successful multi sector partnership.


46 Stories that we choose to tell within the process of agenda framing and their transformative potential was also recognized in the business literature by Livesey et al. (2009) who drew upon the capacity of lan guage to construct realities in the sense of new social visions able to bring upon social change. The authors scrutinized a partnership between a group of rice producers and a group of eco advocates and attributed the success of the initiative and its sust ainable outcomes to the replacement of competing discourses by a novel unitary discourse focusing on textual commonalities between the two parties and summarized in a single concept: eco collaboration. The underlying of these discursive practices is the in teractionist perspective (Blumer, 1969) pointing at the ongoing dynamism of social relationships out of which meaning is continuously recreated. Crosby and Bryson (2010) argued that ultimately, the processes within a partnership should be used to build tr sector collaborations are more likely to succeed if leaders make sure that trust building activities (including nurturing cross Bryson, 2010, p. 223). Molleda e t al. (2008) generically referred to these process outcomes as building relationships More so, according to Provan and Kenis (2008), the level of consensus over goals can be moderate without this hindering the collaborative process; but what the authors suggested as critical issue for the effectiveness of a multi sector partnership is how network relationships are governed, which is also the issue of concern of the next section, the last one to focus on partnering processes.


47 Relational Processes in Multi Sector Partnerships In their case study, Mol erhaps the dimension that required most strategic participation was managing the relationships between partners that culminated in the multi sector p relationships, they referred to the strategic employment of the communication instrumentation that was previously discussed in this chapter in a way in which a relatively equal symmetry in participation is achieved The high level of trust, open dialogue, and sharing of experiences were correlated with successful relationships in a multi sector partnership (Hemphill et al., 2006; Forrer et al., 2010; Page, 2010) with the distribution of trust being considered cruci al especially in the case of shared governance, as opposed to other forms of partnership governance such as lead organization and network administrative organization (Provan & Kenis, 2008). Also, the ability to build trust was included among a successful p artnership dialogue, and sharing, Silvia and McGuire (2010) added the commitment of the partners component of success. In the business literature, Le Ber and Branzei (2 009) described three types of factors that moderate the relationship among partners in a multi sector partnership: (1) Relational attachment, as an expression of fit, compatibility, and constancy of purpose combined with an interest in relationship investm ent; (2) partner complacency, as an erosion of relational attachment between partners due to the taken for grantedness and/or lack of ongoing investment of time and energy into renewing the social value of the partnership; and (3) partner disillusionment w hen unresolved conflicts affect the relationship.


48 As far as ways to build trust, sharing information and knowledge and demonstrating competency, good intentions, and follow through were brought up by Arino and de la Torre (1998) in the context of collabora tive ventures, while failure to follow through and unilateral action were found to undermine trust. In the communication literature, Keyton et al. (2008) i dentified four factors that can influence the exchange process among partners and, consequently, the ir relationships: public private tensions indicating different, specific mind sets of participants; collaboration as strategic constraint, or the beliefs about organizational investment and impact; the individual organization tension, or how confusion is a chieved over the contribution of the individuals and the contribution of the organizations they stand for; and the preference towards accomplishing goals versus processes, or outputs rather than outcomes. Last but not least, it is not only the collaborativ e processes that boost the success of a multi interpretations in terms of level of understanding of problem s, goals, values; transparency and fairness of communication, exchange, and deliberation; and sense of equity of the benefits and costs are the ones that ultimately measure the impact and sustainability of a partnership. The Role of Strategic Participatory Communication in the Processes of a Multi Sector Partnership: Implication s for Public Relations Reviewing what was counted as process in a multi sector partnership in the different fields of study business and organizational behavior, leadership, publi c management and community building, and communication it can be inferred clearly


49 that communication plays a crucial role in all aspects of the partnership process instruments, discursive approach and framing, and relational interactions. The consisten t flow of information among partners and the communication instruments through which it is achieved whether direct or mediated the content exchanged and jointly established through discursive practices, and the relationships nurturing were all correlat ed with efficiency and success. Therefore, a new theoretical proposition is proposed. Proposition 5: Through expertise a s communication technicians, public relations practitioner s ensure a consistent, clear and organized communication flow among all the me mbers of a multi sector partnership for social change Taking a glimpse at the public relations literature, although not in the specific context of multi sector partnerships due to the scarcity of its coverage there are a number of well established the oretical approaches that confirm the essential role communication and public relations capacities play in maintaining collaboration in a multi sector setting. Looking at the rhetorical underpinnings of public relations in the issues management process, He ath (2006) suggested that discursive approaches are essential to collaboration in tackling common issues and pursuing common goals: The best form of rhetoric, in sharp contrast to those symbolic and manipulative ones, is devoted to using discourse to seek the best available truth and set of value priorities to help the community of interested parties to make sound and principles decisions. These decisions advance the interests of the entire community, rather than more narrowly privileging the advocate of th e position. (p. 80) This view is especially valid since every organizational member of a partnership, as previously discussed, enters the partnership with own mind sets and goals, so is


50 primarily an advocate of its own position and interests. Crosby and B ryson (2010) explained: Cross sector collaborations are most likely to create public value if leaders design them (or help them emerge) in such a way that they build on individuals' and organizations' self interests along with each sector's characteristic strengths, while finding ways to minimize, overcome, or compensate for each sector's characteristic weaknesses. (p. 226) Therefore, the process of communication within a multi sector partnership is toric to produce and refine fac ts, evaluations and policies t hrough the processes of advocacy and counter Proposition 6: Through employment of discursive practices and framing activities, the public relations practitioner contribut es to the establishment of a common definition of the pro blem and to the formulation of clear objectives, while taking into consideration individual goals. The definition of public relations as management of mutually beneficial, organization public relatio nships entails some important aspects related to the purpose of this thesis, which is to explain the role of public relations in building and maintaining successful multi while organizational relationships involve communication, it is not the sole instrument of relationship building. Relationships are aff ected by relational history, the nature of the transaction, the the pu blic relations competencies within a multi sector partnership accounting for both a leadership role and a technical, communicational one. The relationship quality in the public relation literature has been associated with her (Thomlison, 2000; Coombs, 2000), with the notion


51 of mutuality (Ledingham & Bruning, 2000) and with the existence of common interests and shared goals among the parties of the relationship which for the most part refer to organizations and their publi cs (Ledingham & Bruning, 1998). To put it in a more complex equation, Ledingham an ffectively managing organizational relationships around common interests and shared goals, over time, results in mutual understanding and benefi 190). Trust and commitment ha ve also been repeatedly associated with quality relationships in the public relations literature, specifically as one of the dimensions of relationships (Hon & Grunig, 1999). Pr oposition 7: Through their relationship management expertise, public relations strategies can help build trust, commitment, and ensure a climate of sharing, and open dialogue within a multi sector partnership. Outcomes of Multi Sector Partnerships. Implica tion s for Public Relations The success of multi sector partnerships for social change was not only associated with internal factors, such as the quality of relationships between the members, but also with external factors, especially from a public value s tandpoint. In the leadership literature, it was argued that: Cross sector collaborations are more likely to be successful if leaders insist on an accountability system that tracks inputs, processes, and outcomes; use a variety of methods for gathering, int erpreting, and using data; and use a results management system built on strong relationships with key political and professional constituencies. (Crosby & Bryson, 2010, p.226) Following, this section discusses two types of outcomes of a multi sector partne rship for social change: one emphasizing the public value of the partnership, or the social problem resolution; and the other one emphasizing the benefits that the


52 individual organizations draw from being part of the partnership. The role of public relatio ns in facilitating these outcomes is also expanded upon. Page (2010) argued for three types of results: brining about political support, building civic capacity or the ability of the beneficiaries to take on leadership positions and address community probl ems, and policy performance in terms of clear society reach a combined threshold, collaboration may become institutionalized as standard practice in a policy field or or et al. (2008) found that an important outcome of a multi sector partnership is the various sectors appear to n ow feel an ownership over development plans of their From the social issue perspective, therefore, the quality of the public goods These being considered, a new proposition can be formulated as follows. Proposition 8: Public relations research and evaluation helps establish the quality of the public goods achieved through collaborative activity, which, in turn, affects member s sector partnership for social change. On the other hand, the outcomes of a multi sector partnership for social change go beyond the social impact. Therefore, it is relevant to bring up the social capital theory, referring to the beneficial connections among individuals. Putnam (2000) elaborated on


53 the distinction between bridging social capital the relati onship a group has with its external stakeholders and bonding social capital the relationships that keep the group cohesion and provide the sense of community. The former is determined by the latter in the way in which the internal cohesion of a group is a necessary condition for building bridging capital. Ihlen (2007) defined s ocial capital through the lens of credentials that an individual acquires through membership in a g view, social capital is therefore built through exchanges and transfer of resources. The sector eating shared meaning, increasing interaction, and shifting the power distribution. In the business literature, Lawrence, Hardy, and Phillips (2002) suggested three levels of outcomes of a partnership: The first order effects are the immediate results of the collaboration process such as the creation of social, intellectual, and political capital, high quality agreements, and innovative strategies. The second order effects are the results of an already functioning partnership such as new partnerships, co ordination and joint action, joint learning, changes in practices, and changes in perceptions. Finally, the third order effects are the long term ones including new collaborations, more co evolution and less conflict, adaptations of services, new instituti ons, new norms and social heuristics for addressing public problems; and new modes of discourse. Approaching the role of communication in the context of multi sector partnerships from a macro (20 10)


54 proposed the Symb iotic Sustainability Model that goes beyond the flow of messages or character of the partnership and its communication to external publics that conden se the actual value of a collaborative process. Otherwise said, it is the benefits resulting for the partners from publicizing the existence of the partnership and its achievements that th social capital theory. Moreover, social capital benefits not only the members of an alliance, as previously suggested, but the society at large (Luoma aho, 2009). Drawing upon aho (2009) defined social ca pital as n social capital within the context of public relations, Luoma aho placed trust and reputation at the core of social capital building. Specifically, social capital formation is seen as a cyclical process involving trust and reputation. Building trust and, consequently, reputation within continuous interactions (within a group) leads to social capital, which in turn defines the possibilities of working together. The role of communication and public relations is therefore emphasized as an intermediary tool for the creation of community and social capital. Proposition 9: Public relations drive s achievements to the various stakeholders.


55 Research Questions To assess and elaborate the theoretic implications for public relations and communication management, this thesis distilled from the aforementioned literature a three leveled framework to foster understanding of multi sector partnership s. The proposed framework highlighted in particular the role and activities of public relations and was p unctuated by nine propositions condensed from the reviewed literature. These propositions allow for the formulation of three research questions. Both theoretical propositions and consequent research questions will be further discussed in the light of the evolution of the Romanian partnership responsible for the creation and RQ1: What was the structure of the multi RQ 2 : What were the specific processes of the multi RQ 3 : What were the outcomes of the multi


56 Table 1 1 Propositions linking public relations roles and activities to factors associated with the successful enactment of multi sector partnerships for social change Stru cture P1: Through the practice of participatory strategic communication, the public relations professional actively enables "the voice" of the beneficiary within the partnership. P2: Through relationship management expertise, the public relations practitio ner ensures a symmetrical distribution of power within the partnership. P3: Through the specific boundary spanning role and relationship management activity, the public relations professional is likely to be a suitable leader for a successful multi sector partnership. P4: Through its institutionalized expertise on boundary spanning and relationship management, a public relations agency would be a suitable antecedent structural arrangement for a multi sector partnership for social change. Processes P5: Throu gh expertise as communication technicians, public relations practitioners ensure a consistent, clear and organized communication flow among all the members of a multi sector partnership for social change. P6: Through employment of discursive practices and framing activities, the public relations practitioner contributes to the establishment of a common definition of the pro blem and to the formulation of clear objectives, while taking into consideration individual goals. P7: Through their relationship manage ment expertise, public relations strategies can help build trust, commitment, and ensure a climate of sharing, and open dialogue within a multi sector partnership. Outcomes P8: Public relations research and evaluation helps establish the quality of the pub lic goods achieved evaluations of the success of a multi sector partnership for social change. ng benefits for each partner involved, through


57 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY according to Babbie (2010 ) is a technique in which case study observations surpass their descriptive role and provide more explanatory insights, being used to discover flaws in and to improve existing social theories; this makes the extended case study the basis of development of more general theories. The author chose to perform this specific qualitative method because the main purpose of this thesis was set to improve understanding of a subject that has not been sufficiently tested within the public relations and communication m anagement research body, which is the multi enters the field with full knowledge of existing theories but aims to uncover D ue to the complexity of the program and its national reach, primary data were gathered from two categories of units of observation. The first category is represented program representatives of public, private, and nonprofit actors involved. In addition, a collateral category of units of analysis was introduced: the second echelon of the program, responsible for the local implementation. Observing these units that basically performed as intermediaries between the partnership and the final beneficiaries, who are the students provided a better understanding of the


58 participation in and results of the educational program. Participants were offered confidentiality through an inf ormed consent form approved by the University of Florida Institutional Review Board. Moreover, because a case study uses multiple sources of evidence (Yin, 1989), this study used the in depth interview technique along with analysis of secondary data to t ry to determine the dynamics of a 12 year old multi sector partnership. A qualitative in between an interviewer and a respondent in which the interviewer has a general plan of inquiry, includ ing the topics to be covered but not a set of questions that must be asked with particular words and in a particular order However, familiarity of the interviewer with the questions is a necessity, allowing the interview to proceed smoothly and keep focused. To describe the interviewing general guidelines, Babbie (2010) said meaning for your general inquiry, and then frame another question to dig into the earli er 320) Besides in depth interviews, there are a number of secondary sources used to develop the case study: Two monitoring reports from two communication intensiv e periods in the life of the partnership: the launch of the current version of the program and the launch of the dedicated online component, www.viatameaunjocserios.ro. The total number of news stories : 60 Newspapers : 8 Onl ine publications: 50 Press agencies: 4 TV news: 3


59 Radio: 1 Business publications: 1 Two news releases sent out on the sam e occasions: init de in parteneriat cu Ministerul Educatiei, Cercetarii, Tineretului si Sportului lanseaza (2010) Internal documents regarding one of the training pro grams developed for inspectors: 8 Training evaluation report 9 two experts in youth psychology pentru profesori, diriginti, si te http://www.viatameaunjocserios.ro A presentation delivered to professors Platforma online along with an e mail with details about the website and a necessary area code to access the dedicated section. A website presentation wrote for the students and disseminated through teachers www.viatameaunjocserios.ro Furthermore, lack ing specific documenta at a national level, a number of research studies, statistics, and press articles dealing substance abuse, smoking, violence were analyzed to suggest the potential outcomes of the program at the social level. The information subsidies were attributed to the members of the partnership The Romanian Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sports; Philip Morris Romania; British American Tobacc o Romania; the Foundation for Pluralism; and the expert psychologists responsible of t he editorial content.


60 Respondent Selection The population for this research represents all the entities involved in the partnership under scrutiny and their representati ves. This case study used a pu rposive and convenient sample. The sample was purposive in the way in which interviewees were selected on the basis of their active present or past involvement with the partnership. The sample was also convenient, as eventuall y the interviewees were selected depending on their availability. A total of 17 interviewees were sent out requests and 12 interviews were finally conducted, due to the non availability of the other five. The internal validity of the research was not consi dered to be at risk, as the information gathered reached a high level of saturation after about 70% of the interviews were conducted. Respondent Description Eight partnership member s and four county coordinators participated in the study. Specifically, the participants were as follows: one representative of each of the tobacco companies involved two representatives of the public relations agency contracted by the companies one representative of the foundation the two expert psychologists responsible for the editorial content of the program and who authored the main educational guide, one representative of the Ministry of Education, three representatives of inspectorates in three different counties in which the program is implemented, and one school counselor. Three of the partnership member representatives were involved in the partnership since its debut in 19 98, while the other five representatives were involved for an average of six years (with two years as the lowest a mount of time o f involvement, and 10 years, as the maximum). As for the county coordinators, the turnover rate of


61 participation was a lot higher, with all of them being in their current position of inspector for educational programs or counselor and dealing with this s pecific program for two years or less. Data Collection The researcher developed two questionnaires which were submitted to the University of Florida Institutional Research Board (IRB) for approval. After approval, the questionnaires were used for in de pth, semi structured interviews conducted by telephone. The interview s lasted between 35 45 minutes o n average. The questions were asked in the tentative order established in the sample questionnaires available in APPENDIX A. The questions are formulated in a broad manner as to avoid bias and to allow for rich, complex answers. However, specific aspects of interest were pursued in the conversation. That is why supplemental questions were asked if the respondents did not cover in their initial answer concep ts considered relevant for this research. These supplemental guidelines are marked in brackets in the sample questionnaire. The author, who was also the interviewer, tried to assess with maximum objectivity her involvement with the case and separate herse lf from the case of interest, t o avoid any possible bias. B ias could have come from the fact that the author briefly worked for this partnership as a team member of the public relations agency that was involved in the program since its concept ion. However, her involvement was limited to two months and solely dealt with the organization of a press conference in 2007. Questionnaire Construction Two different questionnaires were developed, on e for members involved in the partnership, concentrating on the partn


62 and on school inspectors and school counsel ors asking questions about participation within the program, specific local implementation, and outcomes. Both questionnaires were first written in English and then translated in Romanian. The translation was performed using the reverse technique to ensure that the meaning for the questions and concepts used in the original English version stays about the same, and to avoid as mu ch as possible the misinterpretations a regular translation is prone to entail. The research questionnaire addressed to the partnership representatives consisted of 15 open relied heavily on the literatu re review and, specifically, on the set of propositions that highlighted the role of public relations and communication management in the overall success of a multi sector partnership. Therefore, the questions were divided in three categories. The first ca tegory includes questions addressing the structure of the partnership and the possible power interplay, and mainly addresses the concept of participation. The second category includes questions about processes within the partnership, specifically the commu nication pattern, and the concepts addressed are communication instruments, strategies of meaning creation, and relationship building. And, finally, the questions in the third category are concerned with perceived outcomes, both in terms of individual bene fits and in terms of common goals. Because of the complexity of the program and its national reach, a second up of the county coordinators This questionnaire was shorter i n length six questions and the questions were divided in two categories: the first addressing the participation


63 issue (both in the creation and implementation of the program), and the second addressing the asse ssment of impact in the county Data Anal ysis The researcher transcribed the interviews in Romanian. After the data collection both primary and secondary the resulting information was filed in three main pre determined categories following the research questions information was sorted out, a rough conte nt analysis was performed in a search for matching strategy, an empirically based pattern is compared with one or more predicted patterns The findings are narrated in a detached third person voice. Also, the author selected relevant quotes from the interviews to illustrate the findings, specifically, quotes that show agr eement and disagreement, as well as the major points of view regarding the structure, the processes and the outcomes of a multi sector partnership mainly from a public relations perspective. The selected quotes were translated in English by the author w ho is bilingual before being included in the text. Finally, in the discussion section, comparisons are made between the nine propositions resulting from the literature review and the data resulti ng after the empirical research to illustrate their validit y in light of the case Limitations The main criticism generally associated with the extended case study method is its ne case study is put under discussion over a wider period of time: the comparative case study method.


64 However, this study does not aim at generalizations of any kind, but at trying to explain a phenomenon that was scarcely accounted for in the literature of interest (public relations). More than that, it tried to minimize this limitation by looking at the partnership from a historical perspective accounting for its 12 years of existence. re mainly concerned with the communicational aspect and its role in building and maintaining the partnership. The qualitative interview, as a method, is also subject to limitations, as Wimmer and Dominick (2006) suggested. The authors said that due to thei r semi structured nature, it is possible that some respondents will answer different questions, depending Another prominent disadvantage of in depth interviews is their s ensitivity to interviewer bias, as it is likely that the interviewer inadvertently communicate their attitudes and opinions through verbal and intonation cues. Therefore, the validity of the answers is hard to establish. However, through an objective asses involvement in the case and her personal views and opinions, the risk of bias was minimized. Other than these, the subject of the research might have hindered the expression of genuine perceptions about the interactions within the par tnership. Otherwise said, participants might have been weary of sharing their opinions about possible sensitive issues in their relationship with the other partners because of the closed nature of this study, limited to the members of the partnership. Ano ther limitation regards the lack of availability of social impact evaluations within the program. Therefore, even though national reports and studies were used to assess


65 general social change trends in the areas the program addresses, it was impossible to In the end, due to the qualitative nature of th e research, the data analysis was


66 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS Twelve interviews were c onducted over a perio d of six weeks with eight present and past partnership m county coordinators, respectively school inspectors and school counselors. The specific findings are therefore attributed either to partnership me /members/partners county coordinators or to all participants Additionally supplementary data were gathered from secondary sources as described in the methods section: news stories from daily newspapers news agencies, online, radi o TV, business publi cations, number of internal documents regarding output evaluations of and support research studies, exterior to the partnership, b ut including statistical data tential social impact. The findings from both primary and secondary sources of data are organize d in three main sections defined by the research questions and implicitly following the organiza tion pattern of the literature review: structure, processes, and outcomes of the partnership. Under the structure sections, questions of membership and participation, relationship structure and antecedent structural arrangements are included; under the pro cesses section, the findings are filed under communication instruments, discursive productions, and relational process ; and, f inally, the outcome section include s findings ocial issue of concern as well as findings about the benefits by


67 RQ1: What W as the Structure of the Multi Sector P artnership rogram? Members and Participation The present core structur e of the partnership was identified as being two multinational tobacco companies with operations on the Romanian market a foundation and the Ministry of Education, Research, Youth and Sports. Also, two expert psychologists and researchers uthors and a public relations agency were involved, but under a contractual, paid agreement with the tobacco companies. Because of the high involvement with the partnership, both the authors and the public relations agency were for the most part consider ed members of the partnership by all the other members which is how this thesis will refer to them from this point on. In addition, there were a couple more affiliations with this core structure, which en ded up dropping the partnership for specific reason s. According to one representative of the public relations agency the partnership was initially conceived to i nclude all the three tobacco companies i n the Romanian market, but because of budgetary considerations, one of them retracted after the first yea r. Also, one of the tobacco shortly left the official structure of the partnership due to new international regulations that forbade it to partner, under any circumsta nces, with tobacco companies. These were not the only uncertainties within the partnership structure. A fter the first two years, the partnership reached a structural stability in terms of organizational members, but the individual representatives of the entities involved kept changing over d with have


68 companies changed representatives at least once so did the foundation in what said the public relations agency representative who was involved with the partnership since its conception (In depth i nterview, January 25, 2011). However, all but one of the the collaborative dynamic. The explanation of this fact was mostly the stability of some ay this affected the partnership in any way, because I was always there, so the continuity of the rhythm, the strategic continuity, and depth Interview, January 25, 2011). A former participant from one of the tobacco companies made the same observation, referring to th e period she was involved, 1998 to elements, along with the representatives of the foundation, even if it is true that they changed the project manager. The authors of stable as well depth Interview, February 2, 2011). In addition to the stability of some their responsibilities were, so there were no p roblems and the program kept developing profession n depth i nterview, February 3, 2011) One of the expert psychologists pointed out the repeated changes in respect to the minister of education position, which was occupied by at least four different people in 12 R egardless, all of them recognized the importance of this program, the fact that it was very well received in schools and by the teachers, so, no, it definitely oblem related to the repeated political changes at


69 depth Interview, February 10, 2011). In respect to the changes within the companies, she added: We, as authors, were generally not affected in our work and collaboration with the others by a ny of these changes. This is, in my opinion, the advantage of the academic part in a partnership; because you are responsible of the content, you know the subject; you know the academic community, the conceptual frame, and what are the latest developments in education and youth psychology. Therefore, we were left alone to manage the content; after all, we represent the most legiti mate dimension of this program (In dept h interview, February 10, 2011) Only one member pointed out that changes in the level of involvement did occur obstacle was eventually surpassed (In depth Interview, February 14, 2011). The interviews r following a set of focus groups and a national research study concerned with the educational needs of students and their teachers. The national sample included 1,200 students and 400 teachers. The first guide published in the initial stage of the the two expert psychologists in response to the identified needs. One of the participants explained the creation process: The materials were repe atedly modified following the findings of the focus groups and surveys that were applied to the students every year of the pilot different guides until its final one, and [the later ver had only one guide (In depth interview, February 2, 2011) according to both authors interviewed, of which one was included in t he authorship in 2007


70 The teachers and the students did not have any contribution in the creation of the material. However, we have based our work on Romanian statistics regarding the addictive behavior of students, and we also used the discussions [focu s groups and interviews] that we had in the Romanian touched upon these addictions (In dept h interview, February 22, 2011) For the current version of the program, brought up the newly launched website as a comments and stories, and we will continue to ask for their opinions in further trainings; we are also waiting for i nputs from children and parents (In depth interview, January 20, 2011). online platform has separate sections dedicated to eac h category of beneficiaries password, different for every county, and available upon contacting the public relations agency The sections have the interface and the ava ilable materials entirely tailored to their audi ence. For instance, the student section has gender personalized games involving real life situations on drug consumption, smok ing, alcohol consumption, or a n inappropriate beginning of sexual activity ; eventu ally, t hey all end with advice on how to deal with these situations. The website also includes a blog section for each specific category in which everyone is invited to post their opinions. The blog sections did not show much activity, each having fewer th an 10 comments aside from the e online component was launched in the summer of 2010.


71 A higher level of participation was reported by all 12 interview participants in the interviews regarding the i mplementation part of the educational program. The most involved category was the teachers, who, before they passed on the message to their fellow teachers and to with the inspectors b efore the actual implementation of the program to see how we can best administer depth interview, February 10, 2011). Or, in the way another member of the partnership he guide] was only the sch eme, as the discussions were way beyond the established depth interview, February 22, 2011). In support of the who were responsible for the implementation and facilitation of the program in t heir counties, noted that the guide and the curriculum offer ing was received in the counties, but the actual implementation of the educational program depended on several factors suc h as interest in the program, quality o f the teachers involved, and locall y identified control any more, all we can do is consistently disseminate the information, and that is why I am using a blog to communicate with my colleagues in all the scho depth interview, February 23, 2011). The role of the inspectors is to train the people in the territory, according to the participants. We, in turn, train counselors, decision makers the directors and stud ent volunteers. We have student counc ils at the county level, with representatives from each school. They participate in these trainings, and they are interested in the topic; and obviously, we let them speak up and tell us what they think. S ust disseminate the information (In d ept h interview, February 18, 2011)


72 All the inspectors also noted that the guide was mostly used in a conjectural manner for the classes of counseling and orient ation. The school counselor explained how it is used in her school: We establish that once a s emester in week number 10, for example, all the counseling classes will appro ach a certain topic of the program. We establish a model containing activities and discussions that can be approached, and every teacher personalizes his or her class star ting at the general suggestions (In depth interview, February 23, 2011) Extracurricular activities are also preferred as a means of application of the mentioned artistic contests, the atrical performances, and debates on the specific themes among others like substance abuse, and I encourage a positive approach in the w ay in which you t o the kids, instead you illustrate a better alternative, depth interview, February 23, 2011). These findings were supported by the qualitative textual analysis of serious The material is conceived to be an informational tool on topics such as the generation gap, behavioral choices, sex and sexuality, drugs, alcohol, smoking, violence, and media and computer addiction. The organization of the information, as well as the choice of words, invites teachers to use it as a starting point, not as taken for granted information; therefore it provides them with decisional power. domain along with suggestions of class exerci ses and activities, work toward involving the teacher in the lesson planning, rather than providing him or her with standardized recipes.


73 Overall, a ll the agreed that participation of depth interview, February 14, 2010). Relationship Structure One of the members clarified the fact that the relationship structure was sealed formally with a contract, through which the organizations involved the foundation, the two tobacco companies, and the ministry legally agreed on ea partnership contract, for each one of the parts; the partners were consider ed equals their involvement respected exactly what was agreed in t he contract, with more or less dedica tion, but this counts the less, depth interview, February 3, 2011). Aside from the contractual basis, to assess the relationship structure within the partnership, the participants were asked to identify a number of roles in the partnership, between the members prior to the sealing of the partnership. There were no notable relationships between the partners before the establishment of the partnership, aside from a single, brief collaboration between two of them. For the most part, all partners said that they became involved with the partnership through the public relations agency besides on e of the tobacco companie s who contracted the public relations agency All the program the structure, partners, implementation, and development one of the public representative s The rela tionship, otherwise competi tive between the


74 two tobacco companies, was thought to be extremely strong and long lasting due to the common legal inter it is a common problem of the two companies, a well known problem, which everyone is trying to sol depth interview, February 14, 2011). There was a general agreement among the members interviewed that the spokesperson role of the partnership was divided between the foundation, the ministry, and the long standing author of the materials (already established i n Romania as an opinion leader on this problem area especially through her prominence in the media). The general motivation given was related to the legitimacy they provided to the final product in the eyes of external publics. According to o ne of the public relations agency representatives, is not a little brochure distributed in schools, it is part of the curriculum and it has dept h interview, January 20, 2011). One tobacco company representative spoke of herself as the spokesperson for external publics, but more so from the perspective of the company, than on behalf on the partnership. Five out of eight partnership member represe ntatives considered the public relations agency to be the coordinator, whom In depth interview, February 22). Two of the members only referred to the fo rmal contractual agreement, which attributes the coordination role to the foundation, and the remaining member participant mostly referred to their member status and considered the depth interview, February 2, 2011). As far as the


75 four regional coordinators were concerned, the coordinator of the program was considered to be the Ministry of E ducation, although they did report knowing from the mass media about the formal structure of the partnership was announced very transparently when it was launched in December 2007, and I remember the [f oundation ] was involved and that it was fi nanced by [the tobacco companies] and that they had an older program too, which was not implemented in our depth interview, February 18, 2011). A slight disagreement was observed among the representatives in regards to the role of leader in the partnership. Two of the members attributed the leadership role to the financing companies, with a third one suggesting the same attribution, after initially stating the re is no leader. One member considered the public relations agenc y to be the leader, because it managed the dialogue and the overall dynamic of the partnership. One member invested the leading author of the content with the leading role, saying and they always took her o pinion into account, not only on the content (In depth interview, February 22, 2011). The remaining member participant did not know who m to identify in this role. The f our regional coordinators were not asked the question, because they only deal with the m inistry, therefore the ministry would embody all the before mentioned roles The disagreement might have been the consequence of the unclear meaning of A definition was intentionally not provided to the respondents in order to a void biasing the answer.


76 The involvement of the members in the partnership was, on one hand, described as symbiotic because each one was assigned specific tasks, and, on the other hand, in which every partner did their job as agreed. Referring to the administrative endeavors, the leading this [the implementation, administration, timeline management, communi cation] and have no depth interv iew, February 10, 2011). Three of the partnership member representatives talked about the dynamics regarding the involvement over the years. When we started [the program] [the people] were certainly more active, until it became a national program. After that, the activity dropped in intensity, maybe because of the changes that took place as to what people were involved or maybe just because it was going it was necessary to get involved more than on content updates once in a while (In depth interview, January 25, 2011) More specifically, once the activities for children decreased in number after the inclusion in the national curriculum it was especially the involvement of the nonprofit partner that was noticeably reduc ed, accordin g to four of the member representatives They were, how should I say, we are legally bounded to develop these kind of activities through a nonprofit entity, because tobacco companies are not al lowed to develop activities for the children; in t his case, a nonprofit (In depth interview, January 25, 2011). Moreover, one of the members noted that the lack of involvement is n ot an isolated behavior among members of the partnership. Now, the program has entered a sort of routine, so there is really no need for a n active involvement. They do their


77 something all the time, especially since they are all different people, they represent different interests, jobs, responsibilities. Also, the corporations do not consider this program as their top priority right now, but they do want to keep it going (In depth interview, January 20, 2011) Nevertheless, involvement from a financial p oint of view was constant and even increased over time (In depth interview, January 25, 2011). Currently, from a communicational point of view t he involvement is at its low est go over the strategy and updates from the implementation, otherwise we communicate only on a content leve l other thing we might think of one of the public relations agency representative (In depth interview, January 25, 2011). One other member involved with the implementation of the program nation wide, als guide was updated was in 2007, and if I think of it, in 2011 it should be updated, ( In depth interview, February 3, 2011). Antecedent Structural Arrangements The public relations agency was contracted by one of the tobacco compa nies and asked for a proposal for an educational program to incorporate the juvenile smoking prevention compone nt, a legally necessary endeavor for operating tobacco companies in Romania For th e most part, the participants in the interviews said that the public relations agency representative ensured the organization of the activities required by the partnershi p a nd their budgeting from internal meetings, to tra inings with the teachers, to media relations.


78 RQ2 : What Were the Specific Processes of the Multi Sector P artnership F rogram? Communication Instruments Overall, the most commonly utilized communication instruments within the partne rship were, according to all the eight partnership member the questions to be respond e d, we would shoot an e mail depth interview, February 3, 2011). All the members also agreed that they met more at the beginn ing of the partnership, when activity was more intense. At the beginning, we had meetings every month with all the partners, to discuss what is going on, and so on; now, we just meet once or twice a year, and the rest of the communication is done through e mail or phone. Meetings are now kept for the important things we establish at the beginning of every new year and for a range of punctual activities: if we organize a press conference, obviously, we will meet up; if we just need to distribute more materials, for example, we can handle it over the phone (In depth interview, January 25, 2011) Relational Proces s As previously noted, meetings were the most used channel of communication. However, the frequency of the meetings as well as the partners involved varied with the scope of the meeting. To make it more clear in describing the co mmunication management a mong members of t he partnership, the member participants generally re ferred to two meeting types: group communication, involving all partners, and special topic communication, which was problem specific and typically left out some of the partners. The latt er type was more frequent than the former. The coordination of communication among all the partners was attributed to the public relations agency


79 agency has had a very important role; but e ach one of us, if we had something to depth interview, February 14, 2011). Another member participant described the two types of communication approaches more clearly. The meetings we had were taking place at headquarters, there was a person there that was in permanent contact with us, and from [a tobacco company] as well; but myself, the other author of the guide, and the coordinator from the ministry, were in permanent contact, t hrough phone, e mail, meetings a lot of face to face meetings, at each (In depth interview, February 22, 2011) In parallel with the content oriented meetings, administrative types of meetings were going on between the tobacc o companies and the public relations agency course we [the two companies and the agency] were meeting all the time, and, depending on different necessities, with the other partners. There was stuff related to logistics, for which there was no need to involve the ministry or the scientific depth interview, February 14, 2011). O r, as another partner put it, the the ministry every six to eight weeks, we wou ld invite the representatives to our and what are the main aspects of the pro depth interview, February 2, 2011) This mixed communication pattern could account as an explanation of the confusion among some of the mem bers on who was in charge of communication in particular coordinate d the communication among us. We had a jo b to do together and we did it we discussed from one person


80 depth interview, February 3, 2011). Another participant described the communicatio n : eone to communicate all the time. I recall the ministry representative calling us, on the other side it happened to me too to call the others when I needed feedback on the content; it was enough to let someone know, and the information would circulate in t he network. (In dept h interview, February 10, 2011) On the other hand, both public relations agency representatives said that the were meetings between us and the minist ry, us and the authors, us and the financers, depth interview, January 25, 2011). One of them added, among each other, but mainly th depth interview, January 20, 2011). Moreover, according to the same participant, the role of the public relations agency active part, we try to because we are also contracted for this, so it is our job; the other financial crisis and everything, and the leading author is a very busy person and A more freq uent pattern of meetings helped establish a closer relationship within specialized groups, which were specialized on this, [the public relations agency] did manage the general communication and the communication to the external public; but they did not establish interpersonal depth interview, February 3, 2011). In some cases, the relationship among the members con tinued beyond the We continue to collaborate on other projects as wel l, in the same team


81 [authors and the ministry of education representative], because the collaboration was excellent, and therefore depth interview, February 22, 2011). The division among partners in groups of e xpertise, along with the trust in each for which there were generally no communication barriers among the members. I did not feel anything like this. And I think I didn back yard. I cannot advise the financer, and the financer cannot question me on why I included the chapter about violence. There were specialized endeavo each nor had any conflicts. There was no such thing (In depth interview, February 10, 2011) The other author described the seldom ly used negotiation procedures. Generally, our point of view was respected, and even if there were sometimes suggest ions from the others involved, we discussed them and reached a common denominator, because we always took into account the of view was respected as it was. (In depth interview, February 22, 2011) One of the members did bring up a barrier rega exhaustion of the program after it reached the national curriculum in 2004. The solution was the redesign of the program to involve more parents, including an update of the guide, the launch of a new ident ity and an increasing number of meetings in the territory with local decision makers. As agreed by the majority of success of this partnership was associated with the very strong progra m content and materials, beneficiary level. For example, acco rding to one of the partners in the beginning, the program encountered a barrier in the higher echelons of the m inistry of education, due


82 to ethical concerns on whether tobacco companies should be trusted to coordinate a wide spread educational program. The solution relied on and the whole documentation to sit down in the classrooms and see for themselves which they did; from that moment on, they started depth interview, February 2, 2011). A great contributor to success was also agreed to be the commitment of the early enthusiasm that brought it on the national agenda. According to the public relations agency the program, we would stay depth interview, January 25, 2011). One of the expert psychologists emphasized the importance of good quality relationships within the partnership. I motivation that is important, but also the relationships, and I do not mean aura of mutual understandin partnership, things wil l never function on a long term. (In depth interview, February 10, 2011) The commitment and dedication of the partners was consid ered by another member participant to be a major factor in the e o this depth interview, February 3, 2011). She further explained that the success of the entire partnership relies o he consistency, quality of the work, and the passion for an idea; because you can feel these things. When your only concern is to build up an image and put together a press conference just to talk about what a big deal you made,


83 and the whole thing ends up dy Perseverance and the stability of people in the partnership were brought up by one s as to why the relationship between the members was a successful one. When we talk about very complex programs as this one, which last for many, many years and never plan on ending, there is the risk of boredom for instance, one of the engines of the partnership, a constant presence [till 2008], because it is important to have people who know what this is all about, who are familiar and lived through the history of the program, who knows where to look whe ing. (In dep th interview, February 2, 2011) Referring to the same relational aspects, one of the public relations agency representatives described the importance of the relationship mediator. [What is important] is this role of mediator and communicator, the way we maintained the parts in a relationship; we managed the communication between them, we strived to get them on the job when they were needed, or when things were slowing down. There was always someone, us, who made time, call ed every partner when needed, talk ed to everybody in a d ifferent way because, you know, e ach one is different; people are different, ins titutions, interests, and so on (In depth interview, January 20, 2011) Discursive Productions There are two types of discursive productions related to this partnership: the first type refers to the textual productions within the partnership, to serve in the communication management between the partners; and the second type regards the discursive productions decided upon within the partnership but addressed to external parties. The findings to illustrate the first type c a me from the interviews with the participant members, while the second type is illustrated through the textual analysis of


84 secondary data: press releases, speeches, program websi te, and materials delivered to the beneficiaries. As discussed before, the partnership was formed around the initial problem of youth smoking, in the resolution of which the tobacco companies were legally bound to invest. Otherwise said, it was part of th the importance of the issue for the company, I can tell you that my title was, for a ed the more encompassing position of public affairs manager. The public relation agency was in itially contracted by this tobacco company to design and implement one such program to fall in line with the corporate strategy on social responsibility. The prog ram, its development under a partnership, its objectives, and its main components were the public relations agency depth interview, February 14, 2011), to the totality of risk behaviors to which pre adolescents are constantly exposed. After approval by the financers, the prospective partners initially the foundation and the leading author were contacted by the public re lations agency and were presented the idea. The public relations representative involved in the process described the formulation of the : The chain, financers, discussing modifi cations [according to their strategic purposes] and gettin package further to the prospective partners, getting their feedback and apply the last


85 heir long term objectives, not only with ours (In depth interview, January 25, 2011) The lobby part of the program was mostly assumed by the tobacco company who initiated the program program h as had an obvious lobby component with different institutions of the state, which needed to be informed, needed to know the dimension of the program and its depth interview, February 2, 2011). This initial agreement was considered to be very c lear ly and strong ly communicated by all the partners interviewed. The ministry representative, for instance, noted the overlapping between the educational system needs and the way the program looked on the initial materials; they w ere thought to fit the counseling and orientation activity in the education plan that was just being revamped at depth interview, February 3, 2011). The same participant also mentioned the dynamic character of the program, when she said that although the national education plan was modified several e [the partners] tried to mold this program according to each such modi fication and keep the elements that represented an added value for the educational system, and especially for the More so, all eight of the partner representatives agreed that the ong term goals depth interview, February 14, 2011) f rom a common and legally imposed corporate social responsibility priority. The foundati on needed a program to fit its educational mission, as it did not have one at that time. The ministry got a program tailored on its curricular needs for middle school


86 students. The agency got a new long term contract. And, finally, the youth psychologists involved had the opportunity to apply and get financing for one of their lifetime research topics. Following the secondary data analysis of the discursive productions aimed at publics external to the partnership, the findings were as follows. The materials intended to be read by middle school students contained a message adapted for the students and expressed in a lighthearted in formal, factual way The new website presentation for students invited know about drugs, sex, public relations agency with the final approval of the expert psychologists. The materials intended for the teache rs, as seen from the textual analysis of the guide combined the scientific rigor wi th a wide range of examples, case studies, and situations to facilitate their understanding, on one side, and the transmission of the message to the students, on the other. Because of the scientific and pedagog ical expertise involved, the expert psychologists e laborated all the materials designed for professors The materials intended to represent the program for the media and ultimately for the general public the press releases were conceived by the public relations agency and used an informative neutral to ne. However, the expression and organization of the message was modified to fit the editorial preferences of a diverse type of publications, especially in the case of the online platform launch: press agencies and dailies versus [fo undation] in partnership with The Ministry of Education,


87 Research, Youth and Sports launched the online platform of the educational program s no taboos for you and your child: what are the secrets of a healthy parent preadolescent relationship, how to find out if they smoke, magazines. RQ 3 : What Were the Outcomes of the Multi rogram? Social Problem Resolution All the partners related the outcomes of the partnership in terms of social impact to its inclusion on the ministry of education agenda and, cons equently, with its nation wide implementation. Initially started as a pilot, it ended up a nation wide program; the partnership with the central authorities is an extraordinary outcome, otherwise we sa id one of the member representatives (In depth interview, January 20, 2011). The ministry op erationalized the results as number of educational units that implemented 6,400 schools implem ented this program in at least one curricular area [as optional course, in counseling and orientation, or in extra curricular activities] depth interview, February 3, 2011). She explained that the number might be even double considering the fact that the ministry only monitors the schools with legal status, under the L aw on Education (schools that have more than 100 students enrolled). On the other hand, the ministry representative referred to the innovative qualities of the program in 1998, when it was first launched as a pilot.


88 I t changed the perspective of the entire Romanian educational system, of towards, including classical disciplines. We need to change our teach ing approach and include more interactivity, more collaborat ion, in which the students feel part of, and feel that they are important and that all for their benefit (In depth interview, February 3, 2011) One of the c ounty coordinators representative of the authorities in the county since 1996, emphasized the large number of educational programs that have sprung up since 2002. Moreover, all the regional coordinators mentioned several names of ongoing educational progr ams, launched in the last couple of years, among which were One o f these participants expressed her opinion about the importance of these types of educational endeavors. The school realized that in the absence of a coherent relationship [with civil society] and without the expertise of well intentioned partners, the message is poorer. The support is real and wholesome, first of all because of the pragmatic aspects such as the access to important gra nts, an access that is dependent upon an educational diagnosis that cannot be established outside a partne rship (In depth interview, February 23, 2011) As far as behavioral impact on students, one of the inspectors interviewed explained that people in her role are not considering monitoring the behavioral impact of the program because the program was already proven to have a considerable positive impact on students, according to the results of the initial pilot evaluation; these results were the ones that paved pilot county for this program, we have just benefited from the final product and we have implemented it; otherwise said, we assumed the experience of the ones who presented it to us, we use d the tested kit, I mean the guide, along with some other documents and materials such as work sheets for both teachers and parents, questionnaires, and so depth interview, February 23, 2011). The evaluation studies of the pilot program


89 were coordi nated by the foundation, but could not be consulted, as the foundation refused to make them available for the purpose of this study. Referring to behavioral change outcomes, however, all the regional coordinators and the leading author of the guide mention ed an important increase in the number of student depth interview, February 23, 2011). Another two inspectors mentioned the y were implement ing trainin g of student volunteers for peer education activities (In depth interview, February 18, 2011; In depth interview, February 23, 2011) In lack of hands on social outcomes of this program, the author of this thesis pursued a brief analysis of the statistic al data available in Romania dealing with the dynamics of risk behaviors in youth. The purpose was to assess at least a potential impact of the program in the areas of concern. What was concluded in the reports on smoking beh aviors is that students are more i nformed about the risks associated with smoking (82%), but the youth smoking issue tends to deepen (Agentia Nationala Antidrog, 2010 ) T he first cigarette age dropped from 18 to 16 to 14 years of age in the last 7 years. Also, i ncreased consumption of drug s at a young age was observed : in 2006, from the 35,000 drug consumers registered in Romania, about 66% are young people under 25 years of age (Agentia Nationala Antidrog, 2006). According to Realitatea television news outlet, the Romanian Office for Adopt ions said that in only 2006, 1,500 young girls aged 13 to 15 have given birth (Realitatea TV News, 2007). All eight member representatives interviewed agreed that an important part of the resulting from the membership. Each participant was asked abo ut the perceived benefits of membership for the


90 organization they represent and the perceived benefits for other partnering organizations. Agreement was reached at all levels; otherwise said, th e benefits perceived for their own organization, in the case of each representative, were equivalent with the benefits attributed to it by the other participants. These benefits were as follows. For the tobacco companies, the benefit was the perception th at they were p art of the solution, not only the company as a social responsible one, that is preoccupied with the problems it depth interview, February 14, 2011). According to one of the representatives, the tobacco involvement went beyond the legal responsibility. Commercially speaking, they are bound to develop such programs. But if been so involved and so emotionally connected to the program, beyond signing the checks, I think they could limit themselves to creating a couple materials once every five years and be absolutely okay from a legal stand (In dep th interview, January 25, 20 11) According to ducation has the benefit of a considerable investment of $ 500,000 a year (In depth interview, February 2, 2011 ) for a program dedicated to ea, problems, it would be an absurdity to say n o, when you have an extended hand ready to help you depth interview, February 3, 2011). The foundation conside red to have r eached one of its major objectives, one of youth education, along with a n image benefit: this is a program with a huge impact, and depth interview, February 3, 2011).


91 more doors open to them as a consequence well, because our collaboration on t his project was very successful; so we kept the depth interview, February 22, 2011). The leading author elaborated on the benefits. in schools topic, a national program with the Institute for Educational Sciences. So, what I mean is that the they are not isolated incidents. And this process of communication is extremely positive, because everybody needs to know (In depth interview, February 10, 2011) The individual entitie s of the partnership did not communicate their membership separately with the exception of the tobacco company that initiated the program, who s e public affairs manager (and representative in the partnership) was more active in communicating th e partnershi from a corporate social responsibility perspective Of course, we communicated it, because we always believed that the power of the example would generate somewhat more activity in this [social] direction. Because in Romania one of the ma in characteristic of the educational programs is their isolation, they are not financed on a long program was a coun ter example to what is usually getting done in Romania (In depth interview, February 2, 2011) C ommunication to external publics was generally attributed to the public relation s agency, considered to hold expertise in this field. The other tobacco comp s representatives, along with all the other participant members noted that even if they positive exte rnalities still occur due to awareness of the program.


92 We are not activ ely communicating it, but the word spreads out. In the general communication of the program, it is mentioned that we are one of people know about the program, and a lot of peop le appreciate it. Even in discussions with parliament members, sometimes it comes up and they congratulate us for supporting such programs (In depth interview, February 14, 2011) The secondary data analysis showed extensive news coverage of the program, e mass media were reluctant to cover the information about the financial sources for the program; therefore, only 2 out of 46 news items mentioned the tobacco companies, even if the information was included in the news release distributed for the occasion. All news items mentioned the ministry and the foundation as the initiators, with the collaboration of the expert psychologists. All news items were positive in tone, e xcept one television news story in which the message was spun negatively, stating that the program focuses the children attention on sex, drugs and alcohol, instead of education, and showing some teachers outraged at the thought of teaching sexual educat ion to middle school students (Focus News, 2007). The later launch of the online platform, in 2010, did not cause any controversies and had a more modest coverage of 18 articles.


93 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION Nine theoretical propositions were identified in the l iterature review of this thesis This chapter analyzes these propositions for application to the case discussed in chapter 4. Proposition 1: Thro ugh the Practice of Participatory Strategic Communication, the P ublic Relations P r ofessional Actively E nables "the Voice" of the Beneficiary Within the P artnership not formally included in the structure of the partnership, they actively participated in the partnership, to the poin he xplanation, in that there are a lot of materials available for the teachers, and that whether they use it or not depends on their dedication and interest. The participant referred, in fact, to the This power of choice was not established by public relation s strategic participatory practice, but instead was given to the teachers by the central authorities, through the decision on the partial decentralization of the national educational system. Specifically, included in one of the following mandatory educational areas: extra curricular activities, activities within the counseling and orientation class, or optional self standing courses. Therefore, community needs were the ones to ultimately drive the implementation of the program, what topics were approached, and how the information was used (or not).


94 However, strategic participat ory communication was enacted through periodical nnual two or three day were designed to include a pro minent interactive part, in which the inspectors were involved in discussions and workshops, they could share experiences and solution proposals, and Therefore, it can be said that th Proposition 1, as the beneficiaries involvement was the joint consequence of both an authority based and a communication based endeavors. Proposition 2: Through Relationship Management E xpertise, t he Public Relations P rofessional Ensures a Symmetrical Distribution of Power Within the P artnership. governed partnership, in which all members participate on an equal basis and th e power in decision making is more or less symmetrically distributed (Provan & Kenis, established from the beginning of the partnership, as potential partners were, before anyt hing, recruited based on their specific expertise and access to unique resources: money, academics, central authority over the educational system, and civil legitimacy. The partnership therefore, rya & Salk, 2006, p. 215). According to the case, the partnership structure proposal and its communication to the individual part s were the responsibility of the public relations agency. In addition, the coordination role was left to the public relations a gency, which took on the role of


95 (In depth interview, January 20, 2011). It follows that P roposition 2 is supported by the case. Proposition 3: Through the Specific Boundary S panning Role and the Relationship Management Activity, the Public Relations Professional Is Likely to Be a Suitable Leader For a Successful Multi S ector P artnership The person with the longest involvement in the partnership is the managing partner of the public relations agency I am the main person who man ages the relationship between the authorities, the financers, and the nonprofit organi doing this since 1999. Specifically, my tasks range from elaborating the communication strategy to maintaining a coherent dialogue betw een all the p arties involved. I am part of the team who conceived and initiated the program and I continued throughout all these years to develop and think of new tools, and to implement them with the hel p of the partners and financers (In depth interview, January 25, 2011) As previously discussed, the public relations agency through its main long term representative, proposed the structure of the partnership and contacted prospective partners. The roles a ssociated by the participants with the interviews to the long s tanding public relations agency representative although, in most cases, not ass ociated with a leadership position have multiple overlaps with the characteristics of a multi ies; made sure all deadlines were respected (In depth interview, February 22, 2011); important role in managing the group communication (In depth interview, February 14, 2011; February 22, 2011; January 20, 2011; January 25, 2011); and developed new tools (In depth interview, January 20, 2011; January 25, 2011; February 2, 2011; February 14, 2011). Specifically, all these findings are illustrative for the partnership (Silvi a & McGuire, 2010), act creatively and drive innovation (Williams, 2002), sharing


96 The reason for which the public relations agency was not directly associated with the le ading practice might be the consequence of the fact that in Romania partially due to the relative nov elty of the practice the wide spread conceptualization of public relations is still highly related to the technician role. Therefore, t he interviews sho wed a contradictory perception on whether the public relations agency its representatives implied, or whether they were acting more as technicians, as one of the corporate as always decided in depth interview, February 2, 2011). However, the strategy, as defined by the corporate coordinator, Therefore, it was used with the meaning of a tobacc term strategy of juvenile smoking prevention, rather than with that of term strategies aimed at solving a social educational issue. The same representative explained their role in the partnership, in relation to the public relations agency : It is true that the psychologists had proposals on what the steps would be, how it would be addressed [to the beneficiaries], they would coordinate with the foundation and the public relations agency which were the ones to bring t hem all together, and propose an action plan, a timeline and a budget. Then, we would approve of them or not, say that we can do this one, but not the other (In depth interview, February 2, 2011) More so, the public relations agency was identified as the coordinator o f the program by the majority of th e participants; they were program depth interview, February 22, 2011).


97 On the o ther hand, public relations contribution to the structure of this partnership is also evident in the fact that more than half of the people involved in the partnership a t this point have communication/ public relations training: a four person team from the public relations agency and the two tobacco companies re presentatives, both of whose titles are p ublic affairs m anager, and both of whom have strong communications experience. This note is especially relevant since three out of eight participant members i nterviewed suggested that the financers played the leadership role within the partnership. leadership r ole characteristics point out at individuals with strong public r elati ons expertise. Therefore, P roposition 3 is supported by the case. Proposition 4: Through Its Institutionalized Expertise on Boundary Spanning and Relationship M anagement, a Public Relations A gency Would B e a Suitable Ant ecedent Structural Arrangement f or a Multi S ector Partnership f or Social C hange The public relations agency was contracted by one of the tobacco companies and asked for a proposal of an educational program to incorporate the juvenile smoking prevention component, a legally necessary endeavo r for tobacco companies operating in Romania For the most part, t he participants in the interviews said that the public relations agency representative s ensured the organization of the activities required by the partnershi p and their budgeting from inte rnal meetings, to trai nings with the teachers, to media relations. This also fits the characteristics and institutional functions attributed in the literature to the antecedent structural arrangements: mediating, convening, coordinating, giving complement ary expertise, participation across the boundary, and


98 the use of boundary objects (Cash et al., 2006). It can therefore, be concluded that P roposition 4 is supported by the case. Proposition 5: Through Expertise as Communication Technicians, the P ublic Re lations Professional Can Ensure a C onsistent, C lear and O rganized C ommunication F low Among A ll the M embers of a M ulti S ector P artnership f or S ocial C hange. The public relations agency communications represented it as the expert voice in this area among the participant members, who a ll agreed members of the partnership (In depth interview, February 14, 2011) The public relations agency was portrayed as the facilitator of group communication, and especially of meetings, as the partners reportedly met as a group headquarters, but not as much the specialized meetings, which took pl ace independently, especially in what concerned the creatio n of the educational content. Also, eve n if it depth interview, February 14, 2011). The inter nal documents of activities and evaluation report, which, according to the public relations agency representatives, were shared with all the members. This was described as common practice for ea ch important event, which speaks of the consistency of the communication flow among the partners. Proposition 5 is therefore


99 Proposition 6: Through Employment of Discursive Practices and F raming Activities, the Public Re lations Practitioner Contributes to the E st ablishment of a Common D efinition of the Problem and to the Formulation of Clear Objectives, Wh ile Taking Into Consideration Individual G oals. The public relations agency had an important contribution to the frami ng of the initial problem, one that, at the time of its inception, was little more than a corporate strategy essentially based on legal concerns. All the participants aside from the tobacco company that formulated the initial strategic request of a youth smoking prevention program said the program was proposed to them by the public relations agency and that the problem and tentative objectives were clearly communicated to them. ers, depth interview, February 3, 2011). Only t he representative from the ministry said she took on the project one year after the initial proposal, so she did not know who proposed it. The main orga nization that the ministry representative mentioned to have had the most contact with in concern foundation. An explanation of this fact could be the role of the foundation as a legitimate interface betwee n the financers and the authorities and beneficiarie s, an interface requested of private companies as Also, the agenda framing resulted from an active negotiation, involving a n umber from the financers] the prospective partners, getting their feedback and apply the last modifications, for the term objectives, not only depth interview, January 25, 2011). This type of agenda framing in a multi sector partnership for social change, resulting from joint discussions and working

PAGE 100

100 as a highlighter of all the involved partners, was considered by Page (2010) to be the most efficient. T he public relations agency was also the entity in charge of framing the messages for the general public, even if the spokespersons were the leading author, the ministry representative, or the foundation director. This transpired not only from the interview s with the public relations agency representatives, but also from the secondary data, specifically the internal documents of the partnership. The records of the 2007 press All these aspects c onsidered, it can be said that P Proposition 7 : Through Their Relationship Management E xpertise, Public Relations Strategies Can He lp Build T rust, Commitment, and E nsure a Climate of Sharing and Open Dialogue Within a Multi Sector P artnership The public relations agency along with the public affairs managers of one of the tobacco companies involved, considered themselves as relation ships catalyzers, or throughout the life of the partnership, along with their accumulated knowledge about depth interview, Februar y 2, 2011). The public relations agency was most of the time associated with the coordination public relations agency ] had a decisiv e role in the success of this partnership; because even if there are some who mistakenly think that it is all about money and strategy, well, no, the day by day coordination of all the activities, budgeting, the production of materials, the adequacy of the content, the

PAGE 101

101 relationship with the publishing house, the distribution of the material s around the country qua educational product and was associated with the leading author from the very beginning of the partnership, due to her previou s recognized successes that established her as an opinion leader in Romania on the specific problem area. Other than that, tr ust was depth interview, February 3, 2011). And the person in charge of making sure that everybody respected their deadline for their specific task was t he public relations agency e str ived to get them on the job when they were needed, or when things were slowing down. There was always someone, us, who made time, call every partner when needed, talk to everybody depth interview, January 20, 2011). Open dialogue and sharing of experi ences were reportedly the routine, helped by dept h interview, February 14, 2011). The constant expre ssion of fit, compatibility and constancy of purpose, combined with an interest in relationship investment describes the relationships between partners to have a high lev el of attachment (Le Ber & Branzei, 2009). The exchange process was rated very highly by all participant s who declared trust seldom conflict was what Keyton et al. (20 nonprofit partner otherwise

PAGE 102

102 with very little expertise on education to e nsure legitimacy of what otherwise would have been a tobacco companies p roduct (In depth interview, January 25, 2011). Taking involvement and high commitment, but made possible and kept constant over time by good coordinati on it follows that P roposition 7 is supported by the case study. Proposition 8 : Public Relations Research and Evaluation Helps Establish the Quality of the Public Goods A chieved Through Collaborative A ctivity W hich, in T urn, rganizat valuations of the S uccess of a M ulti Sector Partnership for Social C hange. The public relations entity involved with this partnership was not in charge of designing and implementing research evaluation tools. This endeavor was assumed by the nonprofit partner who said it while the program was still in its pilot phase. No concerted evaluations were pursued after the program reached its national status. The quality of the public good was mostly meas u red from an output perspective in numbers of students exposed and this measurement was the direct responsibility of the central and regional authorities. Proposition 8 therefore, seems to not be supported in light of this case. However, there are a number of things that sh ould be considered as far as public relations evaluation in assessing social outcomes. It is true that this thesis mostly looked at the impact such a program would have at a social level, in terms of social problem resolution. Due t o the high difficulty of such extensive measurements, especially from the point of view of social issues complex dynamics new adolescent behavioral risks are bound to appear more often than impact evaluation could be realistically done and of the mult itude of variables to

PAGE 103

103 control for other programs, social and individual influences, etc a more simplified approach can be considered. If so, social change indicators would be limited to intermediary, more measurable steps such as the ones suggested b y Page (2010): bringing about political support, institutionalize good practices, and build the ability of beneficiaries to take on leadership positions; to In this new context, and referring to the case stud y, the public affairs specialization of public relations was said to have initially contributed to bringing the program on the institutional agenda program has had an obvious lobby component w ith different institutions of the state, which needed to be informed, needed to know the dimension of the program and its to sit down in the classrooms and see for thems elves which they did; from that moment on, depth interview, February 2, 2011). As a result, after six years, the program became institutionalized. On the other hand, strategic par ticipatory communication enabled the following the trainings, they acted as leaders in their counties, f urther training their peers on using the information provided i n a way that benefits them and, consequently, the student community they were teaching. In conclusi on, a more testable formulation of the role of public relations for the social outcomes of a multi sector partnership for social change would be the followin g:

PAGE 104

104 Proposition 8.1: Through its public affairs endeavors, the public relations professional can bring about institutionalized social change. Proposition 8.2: Through strategic participatory communication, the public relations professional can build local capacity and, therefore, drive social change. Proposition 9 : Public Relations Drive s y Ensuring Benefits f or Each Partner Involved, Through Effective C ommu nication of the o the Various S takeholders. The main responsible of communicati ng t external publics was the public relations agency. Besides it active communicational efforts were only made by the tobacco company who initiated the project, from a corporate social r esponsibility stand. All members reported individual benefits coming from their high awareness member status, otherwise said, increased social capital (Bourdieu, 1986). As a long 2) categorization is followed, which means long term effects including new collaborations reported both for the foundation and the expert psychologists. Also, communicating the partnership was considered by the tobacco companies representatives to boost p erception s of their companies as socially resp onsible, which is in agreement to the Symbiotic Sustainability Model proposed by ( 2010) These being said, P roposition 9 would be supported by the case. Final C onclusions After reviewing the multiple bodies of literature purposefully chosen as academic sector partnerships for social change this study aimed to illustrate the essential contribution of the public relations roles and act ivities in building and maintaining effective multi sector partnerships for social

PAGE 105

105 change. Specifically, its contribution was to have distilled from a multi disciplinary literature a set of theoretical propositions expressing the contribution of public rel ations s Therefore, this study proposed nine theoretical propositions introduced to form a theoretical foundation for future qualitative and quantitative studies. Further, the author studied a case about the multi sector partnership behind the Romanian educational conclusions are as follows. Eight out of nine theoretical propositions were fully s upported in light of the case study. Only one proposition was modified, because, in the context of the case, it was shown to be out of reach Two propositions stemming from the same aspect public relations roles and activities in bringing about social c hange were proposed instead. The study is a prime example of the contribution of public relations role and activities to the effectiveness of multi sector partnerships for social change. From a practice in the development related fields, and more than that, it illustrates from a relationship management point of view, the leading role of the public relations practitioner in collaborative practices. It speaks particularly of public relations agen multi sector partnerships for social change From a macro perspective, it also points out a n enlargement of the points of practice area for the profession, going beyond the widely established corporate centric pra ctice. This aspect is highly important for the public relations practices, which, as noted in the first chapter, are often and stereotypically associated with endeavors

PAGE 106

106 aimed at maintaining the status quo by favoring the powerful in society. This thesi s, through s howcasing a different mission of public relations, contributes toward the establishment of public relations as a legitimate and socially important profession. Public relations does not only voic e corporate interests, it coordinates a choir of v oices of nonprofit organizations, of governments, and private companies to ultimately help enact social change. Otherwise said, this thesis illustrates the social role of public relations. Furthermore, t he findings have an important standing in view of the development practice. The fairly new paradigm of participation as a path to genuine and sustainable development cannot be conceived in the absence of strategic public relations. Public engagement, relationship building with stakeholders, effective man agement of information and communicational flow, framing, and mediation are inseparable of effective participatory development. It follows that development agencies ought to reconsider the role of communication professionals, beyond the technicalities of t heir work toward a more strategic involvement The findings also speak about a weakness of the public relations practice in what concerns measurements and evaluation. In light of the case study, this weakness can be attributed to the different dynamic of the professionalization of pu blic relations in Romania. Specifically, due to the transitional character of the Romanian economy, from a state driven system to competition and free market, there was a generalized confusion about the role of the newly emerge d public relations profession. This was prone to hinder the development of adequate tools to measure public relations impact and achievements. Another possible reason for which impact evaluation is generally not

PAGE 107

107 conducted in Romania could be the high costs associated with the research behind it, which for the most part are not approved by the clients. Efforts should be made toward establishing the importance of public relations outcome evaluation for the effectiveness of any strategic communication efforts. This study is subject to a number of limitations. A s explained in the limitations section in chapter 3, due to the qualitative characteristics of the method, the validity of these results cannot be extended beyond the case study. They should be consider a s the starting point of a research endeavor to establish the role of public relations roles and activities in effective multi sector partnerships for social change. Further research is needed in order to establish their applicability in other situations / pa rtnerships. Future Research Future studies should include multiple case studies of Romanian multi sector partnerships for education, both successes and failures, to determine whether or not the contribution of public relations roles and activities makes fo r a significant difference in their effectiveness. Also, future research should go beyond Romania and beyond education related issues to study cases in diverse countries and on diverse social problem areas, but guided by the same propositions. It would be interesting to see the extent to which the dynamics of a multi sector partnership and its public relations component would be modified by the variation of the political setting s specifically if the system is not centrally coordinated. This diverse range o f case studies would further refine the propo sed theoretical propositions; therefore quantitative testing could be further designed to establish external validity of the final conclusions reached.

PAGE 108

108 APPENDIX A INTERVIEW QUESTIONNA IRES Interview Questionn aire 1 English Version 1. ? How long have you bee involved? 2. Did the individual representatives of the other organizational partners change over time ? a. [If any changes within the partnering formula either or both at an organizational and at an individual level] How do you think this affected the dynamics of the partnership and its outcomes over time? 3. What role did the teachers the students, and their parents play in the creation and imple mentation of this program ? Please illustrate with an example or two. a. How do you think this affected the implementation of the program? 4. What was the relationship, if any, between the members prior to the partnership creation? What role do you think this pla yed in the final structure of the partnership? 5. How would you describe the involvement of the partners over time? a. [The answer should be broad. Categorize the answer by individual interests, time allocation, resources allocation, communication intensity] b. [If the answer is not comprehensive] i. What about involvement in terms of time allocation? ii. What about involvement in terms of individual interests? iii. What about involvement in terms of resources allocation? iv. What about involvement in terms of communication intensi ty? 6. Who is the leader of the partnership? 7. Who is the coordinator of the partnership? 8. Who is the spokesperson of the partnership? a. b. [If one person] Which are his / her attributions? 9. How did you [the members] establish the goals of this partnership? 10. organization? What about the individual goals of the other partner ing organizations? 11. How was the communication between the partners managed throughout the time? a. [Categorize for direct communication interpersonal communication, group meetings and mediated communication e mails, telephone etc.] b. [If the answer does n ot address one of these categories] i. What about direct forms of communication such as meetings? ii. What about mediated forms of communication such as e mails? c. Who was in charge of the planning?

PAGE 109

109 12. What can you tell me about the barriers to communication in terms of differences among partners? Please illustrate with examples. a. [Categorize for organizational culture, resources, involvement, and power] b. [If not extensively covered in the answer] i. What about organizational culture / resources / involvement / power? c. Were these barriers considered a functional disadvantage? If so, what was it done to overcome it? 13. How would you describe the commitment of the partners to the partnership? 14. What are the outcomes of this partnership for your organization? a. What benefits did your organization, as a member of this partnership receive as a consequence of partaking in this partnership? 15. If you were to make a list of the most important factors contributing to a s uccessful collaboration within this multi sector partnership, what would i t be?

PAGE 110

110 Chestionar de Interviu 1 Varianta in Limba Romana 1. implicat / implicata? 2. De a lungul timpului, s au mai schimbat reprezentantii individuali din partea organizatii lor partenere? a. [Daca au fost schimbari in formula parteneriatului] Cum credeti ca au afectat aceste schimbari dinamica parteneriatului si rezultatele inregistrate de a lungul timpului? 3. Ce rol au jucat profesorii, elevii si parintii in crearea si implementa rea acestui program? Va rog sa ilustrati cu unul sau doua exemple. a. Cum credeti ca a afectat acest fapt implementarea programului? 4. A existat o relatie intre membrii parteneriatului inainte de formarea parteneriatului? Daca da, care a fost ea, si ce rol cred eti ca a jucat in crearea parteneriatului? 5. Cum ati descrie dumneavoastra implicarea partenerilor de a lungul timpului? a. [Raspunsul ar trebui sa fie larg. Categorizeaza raspunsul in functie de interese individuale, alocare de timp, alocare de resurse, si int ensitatea comunicarii] b. [Daca raspunsul nu estte cuprinzator] i. Ce mi puteti spune despre implicare ca interese individuale? ii. Ce mi puteti spune despre implicare ca alocare de timp? iii. Ce mi puteti spune despre implicare ca alocare de resurse? iv. Ce mi puteti spune despre implicare ca intensitate a comunicarii? 6. Cine este liderul parteneriatului? 7. Cine este coordonatorul parteneriatului? 8. Cine este purtatorul de cuvant al parteneriatului? a. [Daca personae diferite sunt identificate in aceste roluri] Care sunt atributiile liderului / coordonatorului / purtatorului de cuvant? b. [Daca o singura persoana este identificata] care sunt atributiile lui / ei? 9. Cum ati stabilit [dumneavoastra, membrii] obiectivele parteneriatului? 10. Cum au reflectat aceste obiective obiectivele organiza tiei pe care o reprezentati? Dar obiectivele celorlalte organizatii partenere? 11. Cum a fost gestionata comunicarea dintre parteneri de a lungul timpului? a. [Categorizeaza pentru comunicare directa interpersonala, intalniri si mediate telefoane, e mailuri ] b. [Daca raspunsul nu adreseaza una dintre categorii] i. Ce mi puteti spune despre formele directe de comunicare, ca, de exemplu, intalniri? ii. Ce mi puteti spune despre formele indirecte de comunicare ca, de exemplu, e mailuri si telefoane? c. Cine a fost responsab il de gestionarea comunicarii? 12. Ce puteti sa mi spuneti despre barierele de comunicare datorate diferentelor dintre parteneri? Va rog sa ilustrati cu exemple. a. [Categorizeaza pentru cultura organizationala, resurse, implicare, si putere]

PAGE 111

111 b. [D aca raspunsul nu e ste cuprinzator] i. Ce mi puteti spune despre bariere legate de cultura organiza tionala / resurse / implicare / pu tere? c. Aceste bariere au fost considerate un dezavantaj functional? Daca da, cum au fost ele depasite? 13. Cum ati descrie nivelul de dedicare al par tenerilor? 14. Care sunt rezultatele acestui parteneriat pentru organizatia dumneavoastra? a. Ce beneficii a avut organizatia dumneavoastra ca si consecinta a participarii in acest parteneriat? 15. Daca ar fi sa faceti o lista cu cei mai importanti factori care au co ntribuit la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi?

PAGE 112

112 Interview Questionnaire 2 English Version 1. when have you been personally involved? 2. What role did you play in the program? a. Were you consulted in regards to the creation and implementation of the program? 3. Who do you most keep contact with from the organizers of the program? 4. What were the activities you developed as part of this program? Please provide some examples. 5. What were the outcomes of this program in your county / school? 6. sector partnership. How do you think this formula impacted the education quality?

PAGE 113

113 Chestionar de Interviu 2 Varianta in Limba Romana 1. C scoala dumneavoastra? De cat timp ati fost implicat / implicata personal? 2. Ce rol ati jucat in program? a. Ati fost consultat / consultata legat de crearea si implementarea acest ui program? 3. Cu cine pastrati legatura cel mai des dintre creatorii programului? 4. Care au fost activitatile pe care le ati dezvoltat in cadrul acestui program? Va rog sa mi dati cateva exemple. 5. Care au fost rezultatele acestui program in judetul / scoala dum neavoastra? 6. sector. Cum credeti ca a influentat aceasta formula calitatea educatiei?

PAGE 114

114 APPENDIX B INTERVIEWS In depth interview, January 20, 2011 Q: Spune mi, te rog ce rol ai acest moment si de cat timp ai fost implicata. C.B.: Pai, practic noi reprezentam rolul comunicatorului in parteneriat, ca agentie adica, agentia care practic a gandit proiectul initial, conc eptual initial acum multi ani, fiind intermediator intre toate celelalte parti ani de zile; eu personal, am luat contact cu el de cand am intrat in agentie [acum 5 ani] dar mai concret cam de un an, un an jumate, cand am inceput sa prezentam partea de onli ne in cadrul programului. Q: Deci partea de online a aparut acum un an, un an si un pic C.B.: Site ul a fost dezvoltat acum un an si jumatate la propunerea noastra si a fost conceput ca o dezvoltare a platformei, deoarece foarte multi copii din grupul targ etat au stat pe net. Deci a fost o tentativa de dezvoltare a programului, dincolo de manual si de traininguri. Deci practic de un an si ceva eu, impreuna cu inca o colega, si, mai recent, inca una acum suntem trei ne ocupam de site. Q: Am inteles. Deci pe langa Iulia, mai sunteti trei care se ocupa de site? C.B.: Da, la inceput am fost doua, acum suntem trei, pentru ca s au mai schimbat proiectele / taskurile prin agentie; timp de un an am fost doua, acum a aparut a treia persoana si am predat proiectul de la unul la altul; s au schimbat un pic persoanele implicate. Q: Am inteles; imi spui te rog cu cine dintre parteneri ai interactionat cel mai des de cand ai inceput sa lucrezi pentru program? Cu cine ai intrat in contact? C.B.: Toata relatia a fost tin uta de Iulia, fiindca au tot fost schimbari de oameni de proiect, ea a tinut legatura cu cei de la Philip Morris, cu cei de la British American Tobacco, cu doamna Liiceanu, practic eu nu prea am interactionat cu ei; motivul fiindca nu am vrut sa schimbam persoana de contact; nu prea am interactionat, practic am avut o intalnire cu reprezentantul de la BAT, ca interactiune directa. Acum am inceput sa comunicam cu ei de vreo saptamana, dar foarte putin. Ar mai fi trebuit sa particip la traininguri, dar n am mai plecat pana la urma fiindca am fost foarte ocupata si s a dus tot Iulia singura. Altfel, i as fi cunoscut pe toti, dar n am putut ajunge, n am avut timp. Q: Revenind, practic ati avut o intalnire face to face, nu?

PAGE 115

115 C.B.: Da, face to face. Q: Asata se i ntampla des? C.B.: A fost pentru a pune cap la cap lucrurile pe care vrem sa le facem anul asta. Q: OK, deci cam la inceput de an. Deci v ati intalnit sa planificati ce faceti pe anul asta doar cu BAT ul? C.B.: Da. Nu, cea de la PM trebuia sa ajunga si ea, dar a uitat de intalnire, n a mai venit, o prostie de asta. Trebuia sa ne intalnim toti, dar n a venit tipa. Noi facusem asa, niste mici propuneri, sa o cunosc si eu pe Mihaela, si practic am vrut sa vorbim asa in perspectiva, sa vedem ce e mai important pentru ea; am discutat strict pe site. Q: OK, deci voi ati facut propuneri pentru site. C.B.: Da, discutia a fost strict pe online. Altfel, annual, se mai printeaza ceva manuale pentru distributia in tara si se mai fac traininguri cu profesorii; cam asta d e intampla din cate stiu eu in offline, ca sa zic asa. Hai sa ti zic si de contractul nostru cu ei. Avem un fee lunar strict pe partea asta de online si restul sunt actiuni punctuale cand apare trainingul, discutam despre training si asa mai departe. Q: Deci cel mai important acum este fee ul lunat pe componenta de online, ca actiune permanenta. C.B.: In rest e trainingul profii care se intampla o data de doua ori pe an in diverse locatii din tara iar noi ne ocupam cu organizarea intregului training; iar altfel, daca s au terminat manualele sau trebuie suplimentate copiile, se mai printeaza manuale. Dar sunt strict punctuale cand e nevoie. In rest programul se deruleaza de la sine, in scoli, de nu ai foarte mult de intervenit asupra lui. Q: Ca e deja stabi lit. C.B.: Da, ca ruleaza de atata timp. Q: Hai sa ne referim la site. Ce rol au jucat parintii / copiii/ profesorii in crearea si implementarea proiectului asta? C.B.: Ideea de site a venit de la noi ca o completare la ceea ce se intampla in scoli. Un no u tool in cadrul programului in ideea ca e foarte usor sa i gasesti pe toti online, mai usor decat sa faci tot felul de tururi offline pentru fiecare, e greu; si, realmente, ne am gandit ca pustanii din scoala generala si mamele stau destul de mult pe onli ne, deci sunt un target potrivit. Site ul

PAGE 116

116 ii targeteaza pe toti profi, elevi, parinti si exista o sectiune dedicata pentru fiecare; practic ei niciunul nu au contribuit la site; a fost doamna Liiceanu care oarecum si a dat avizul pentru tot ce e scris acolo, mai ales la inceput. Noi acum il mai dezvoltam si continuam sa scriem articole; ea si a dat acordul pentru informatii, pentru ca vorbim despre teme si problematici care deriva din manual. Practic site ul continua filosofia manualui decizia e a mea viata mea, un joc serios; deci ea isi da acordul pentru ce e scris acolo. De contribuit, stiu ca au mai contribuit niste profi in zona de profi care au scris comentarii sau povestirile lor zona care e parolata si s ar putea sa mai luam de la ei pe la traininguri, sa le mai cerem pareri si sa impartaseasca experiente. Q: Experiente in legatura cu predatul manualului? C.B.: In legatura cu interactiunea cu elevii; practic toate sectiunile cam asta; pentru copii se vorbeste despre tentatii, despre problem ele adolescentei si cum sa raspunzi; la parinti, mai ales cum sa gestionezi problemele pe care le are copilul tau si la profi la fel: cum sa gestionezi comunicarea cu adolescentul, cum sa vorbesti cu el la orele de dirigentie, cum se schimba mediul in scoa la, ca nah, nu mai e scoala ca acum 20 de ani si genul asta de lucruri. Q: Deci e un mediu interactiv? C.B.: Da, cel mai mult profii au scris iar doamna Liiceanu a aprobat toate articolele si mai intentionam sa mai facem cu Liiceanu anul asta cat de curand un fel de editoriale pentru parinti. Cum sa vorbesti cu copilul tau, filmulete etc. Q: Da, da, da. Parintii zic ceva, sau li se ofera materiale? C.B.: Exista un blog pe fiecare sectiune in parte; ideea e ca n a fost foarte activ pana acum; noi l am lansat in vara, in Iulie; am stat cu el jumatate de an pentru ca ambele doamne de la PM si BAT au fost pe rand in concediu de maternitate si nu puteam sa facem nimic cu niciuna si am stat cu site ul peste jumate de an in aer; si abia acuma ne am apucat mai serio s de el, incercam sa facem sectiunea de blog un pic mai dinamica, au mai inceput acum oamenii sa intre pe blog, sa posteze, sa comenteze. Q: Deci tu si cu cele doua colege mentineti site ul. C.B.: Da, practic il dezvoltam, scriem articole, adunam testimon iale, adaungam meniuri, raspundem intrebarilor de pe site si l promovam; acum avem o campanie pe Google, pe forumuri pt femei, copii, pe Hi5, Facebook acum asteptam un ok de la client pe asta s.a.md. Q: Pt ca ai zis ok ul de la client, la cine te refer i exact? De la cine iei OK ul?

PAGE 117

117 C.B.: Pai, de la Mihaela de la BAT si Simona de la PM. Q: OK C.B.: Dar practic comunicarea se face mai mult cu BAT. Foarte rar cu PM. Q: Cum ai descrie nivelul de implicare a l partenerilor in momentul asta? C.B.: Acum programul a intrat intr o rutina, si atunci nu e nevoie ca permanent sa se intample nicio activitate intense pe partea asta; practic niciunul dintre parteneri nu are acum vreo activitate intensa. Exista momente in care toata lumea se strange laolalta si mai face o actiune, cum e trainingul, cum e partea cu manualul, D na Liiceanu mai updateaza manualele periodic, noi le printam, samd; dar oarecum toata lumea e rutinata si el are o constanta; in momentul in care s e mai dezvolta ceva, nah, toata lumea se implica. Acum noi suntem cei permanent activi, ne straduim, ca suntem si contractati pentru asta, deci e jobul nostru; acuma, nu se omoara nici unii. Cele de la PM si BAT au cu totul alte treburi si preocupari pe la ei prin companii cu criza si alte cele, dna Liiceanu e o peroana foarte ocupata si nu vine foarte usor, e greu de dat de ea; stii cu e ea, in peisajul nostru romanesc e o personalitate, merge la evenimente, e o persoana foarte ocupata. Astfel incat nu e o implicare maxima acum; dar nici nu e nevoie; adica nu i ca sunt dezinteresati, adica sunt si dezinteresati, dar nici nu e o necesitate tot timpul; practic programul se dezvolta in jurul manualuilui care e predat in scoli; dar partenerii cu fiecare an se i ntalnesc si si reinnoiesc fiecare obligatiile e in regula. Adica PM si BAT isi aloca si ei bugete, dna Liiceanu vine la toate trainingurile pentru profesori iar cand e nevoie mai updateaza manualul, mai se uita pe site. Fiecare are jobul lui. Ministerul se implica mai mult pe partea de trainiguri si manuale, tot ce tine de profesori. Deci isi fac jobul, dar nu tre sa faca ceva tot timpul, plus ca sunt diferiti ca persoane, ca interese, ca joburi si responsabilitati. Iar cei de la corporatii nu considera ca acest program e o prioritate, vor sa l pastreze dar nu se dau peste cap. Cand le trimit ceva dau feedback peste trei saptamani; nu se grabesc, ca au lucruri mai arzatoare gen inchideri de fabrici care sunt mai nasoale. s Q: Am inteles. Deci exista cumva o i ntalnire anuala in care se stabilesc bugetele pentru anul nou si alte planuri aditionale si apoi merge totul de la sine? C.B.: Da, exact. Q: Ok, si intensitatea comunicarii e la fel: la inceput, se aduna toata lumea in functie de interese si de timp, iar d upa aceea doar pe traininguri si manuale.

PAGE 118

118 C.B.: Da, au cateva momente pe an: inceput de an, inainte de traininguri, cam asta; in rest, comunicarea e destul de slaba si practic e intermediate cel mai des prin noi. Noi tinem legatura cu doamna Liiceanu, Iuli a vorbeste si cu ministerul; practic asta e rolul nostru, de intermediator intre ei. Normal ca mai vorbesc si ei intre ei dar in principal prin noi. Q: Deci voi sunteti la curent cu tot ce se intampla? C.B.: Da. Q: Sunteti implicate in toate componentele? C.B.: Da. Q: Cine e liderul parteneriatului? Dar coordonatorul? Dar purtatorul de cuvant? C.B.: Lider, purtator de cuvant, si..ce ai mai zis?, coordinator. Cand spui purtator de cuvant, cum il definesti? Q: Ma refer la reprezentatunt parteneriatului pent ru publicul larg, cine raspunde la intrebari din partea presei, cine este imaginea publica. C.B.: Aici e un pic ciudat. Cred ca purtator de cuvant ar fi doamna Liiceanu; pentru parteneriat conteaza foarte mult ca ea e implicata in program, ea si ministerul fiindca ei asigura legitimitatea cand vorbesc despre program; faptul ca ea a scris manualul, ca totul de intampla sub egida ministerului, ca nu e doar programul unei fundatii sau al unei companii, ci este legitim. Dar asta daca vorbim despre reprezentant ului in ochii publicului, nu intern in cadrul parteneriatului. Coordonatorii suntem noi. Nu controlam neaparat toate lucrurile fiindca depinde de multe alte chestii dar practic ceea ce se intampla e coordonat de noi. Cat despre lider, chiar nu stiu ce sa z ic. Q: Ok, nu e nicio problema. Q: Revenind un pic la comunicarea dintre parteneri, de cand esti tu implicata, cum ai descrie o? Ma refer la directa vs. mediata C.B.: Mai, de obicei cu PM si BAT sunt foarte putine intalniri pe an intre noi si ei. Cu dna L iiceanu comunicarea se face prin telefon si adesea stiu ca Iulia se ma duce pe la ea, pt ca banuiesc ca prefera face to face, ca nu mi imaginez ca madam Liiceanu sta sa citeasca mailuri. Cu PM si BAT e si din cauza de ritmul in care lucram. Cu dna Calugaru l nu prea stiu.

PAGE 119

119 Q: Au existat la un moment dat bariere de comunicare intre parteneri, din experienta ta cu parteneriatul? Daca au existat, spune mi te rog daca au fost depasite si cum. Da mi te rog un exemplu. C.B.: Nu mi vine nimic sincer; cu siguranta au fost dar nu mi amintesc, poate e si din cauza faptului ca n am fost foarte implicata in relatii. Q: Mi ai spus la un moment dat de feedback uri relativ incete din cauza problemelor mai stringente pe care le au companiile la momentul asta. C.B.: Da, da, da. Asta asa e. Si s au nimerit si cele doua doamne in concediu de maternitate, nu le prindeam pe niciuna; a fost foarte greu din cauza asta, mai ales ca nimeni de la ele din companii nu a vrut sa preia partea asta, sa se ocupe de proiect in locul lor. Int eresul pentru proiect era mic, dar au avut si probleme in companii au inchis fabrici, probleme cu accizele si legislatia, au crescut accizele, piata nu mai e profitabila. Deci programul saracul nu e in capul agendei. Q: Ce mi poti spune despre distributi a de putere? Cine are cea mai mare greutate, ca sa spun asa, in decizii? Exista cineva cu drept de veto mai pronuntat? C.B.: PM si BAT sunt decision maker ii fiindca realmente ei sustin financiar programul de atatia ani. Q: BAT si PM in egala masura? C.B.: Da, eu acum zic din diferentele de implicare ale persoanelor, dar formal vorbind, da in egala masura. Unii se implica mai mult, atii mai putin, deci ar parea ca nu au aceeasi greutate, dar au. Ca putere, au putere relativ egala. Dna Liiceanu apare destul de rar cand ei o solicita. Si atunci normal ca ea e importanta, toata lumea asculta de ea cand isi da cu parearea pe o chestie legata de continut, de psihologie; in rest, nu, [PM si BAT] ei sunt decion makerii de departe. Q: Ce mi poti spune despre rezulta tele parteneriatului? Ma refer la doua aspecte: 1) problema sociala educatia tinerilor preadolescenti, daca esti la current cu ceva rezultate; si 2) ca scop individual al fiecarei companii: care e perceptia ta despre beneficiile pe care le au ei ca urmar e a implicarii in parteneriat? C.B.: Mai, cu rezultatele e mai dificil, poate e mai usor prin prisma profesorilor de la training, cred ca de la ei e cel mai important de vazut, acolo e feedback ul real, daca elevii cat de cat percep lucrurile altfel si is i mai schimba atitudinea. Mai departe e greu de spus, pentru parteneri a fost foarte important faptul ca dintr un program pilot cum a fost initial a ajuns

PAGE 120

120 program la nivel national; parteneriatul cu ministerul e o mare realizare, ca nu foarte multe scoli a r fi acceptate. Q: Si ce beneficii ar avea ei, derivate din accest succes? C.B: Mai, in niciun caz beneficii de imagine. Ei nici nu comunica ca sunt in spatele acestui program. Nu au spus niciodata ca ei sunt in spatele programului si nici nu si propun che stia asta. Adica la ei e un fel de CSR, dar nu pe partea de imagine, realmente. Ei fiind parte din piata de tigarete trebuie sa previna fumatul minorilor. Au obligatia legala prin business ul pe care il fac sa previna fumatul juvenil. De aici o gramada de programe de preventie toate punctele de vanzare. Deci e mai mult decat CSR, e o obligatie si pentru ei chiar nu conteaza ca imagine. Beneficiul: legal. Punandu le pe piata, trebuie sa prev ina si pe termen scurt si pe termen lung funatul in cadrul minorilor fiindca pe piata se vand la liber. Q: Ultima intrebare: daca e sa faci o lista cu factorii care au contribuit sau contribuie la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi? C.B.: Pai o data ar fi dna Liiceanu, fiindca participarea dumneaei a tras practic tot proiectul in sus, ajutat foarte mult ca argument la minister. Asa cum ziceam ea si ministerul ne au scos din anonimat. Nu mai e o brosurica fluturata prin scoli, ci in felul asta a deven it materie de invatamant pentru copii. Plus ca are [materialul] valoare pedagogica si stiintifica. Iar un al doilea factor de success, banuiesc ca noi, ca am avut acest rol de mediator si communicator, cam am mentinut lucrurile in relatie; am gestionat com unicarea intre ei, am tras de ei cand era nevoie, cand, nu stiu, mai incetineau lucrurile. Totdeauna a existat cineva, noi, care sa si faca timp, sa traga de fiecare partener in parte cand era nevoie, sa vorbeasca cu fiecare diferit ca nah, sunt diferiti f iecare in parte ca persoane, institutii, interese, si asa mai departe. Multe le am spus din experienta indirecta de a lungul timpului, fiindca nu am fost implicata direct in relatie. In depth Interview, January 25, 2011 Q: Ce rol ai tu in parteneriatul di cat timp ai fost implicata? I.T.: Pai eu sunt principalul om care manageruieste relatia dintre autoritati, finantatori si partea civila, si fac asta din 1999, de 11 ani. Ce fac concret de la strat egie de comunicare pana la mentinerea dialogului coerent si ok intre toate partile implicate in parteneriat.

PAGE 121

121 Q: Deci de la inceputul programului I.T.: Da, pentru ca fac parte din echipa care l a gandit si l a initiat si am continuat in toti anii astia sa d ezvolt si sa gandesc noi tools uri si sa le implementez cu ajutorul partenerilor si finantatorilor. Q: OK. Din punct de vedere al statutului vostru ca agentie, voi lucrati pentru Philip Morris sau pentru Philip Morris si BAT? Bugetul de unde vine? I.T.: Pe ntru amandoua, PM si BAT. Programul initial a fost conceput initial pentru toate companiile producatoare de tutun de pe piata din Romania, PM, JTI si BAT. Dar din considerente de buget, JTI s a retras dupa primul an de participare si au ramas doar PM si BA T, ei fiind in continuare finantatorii programului. Deci lucram pentru ambele parti implicate. Q: De cand ai fost tu activa in parteneriat, in ce masura s au schimbat oamenii implicati din partea organizatiilor membre? Cum au afectat aceste schimbari dinam ica parteneriatului? I.T.: S au schimbat cam toti oamenii cu care lucrez, mai putin unul dintre autorii continului de program, Aurora Liiceanu; in rest la ambele companii, atat la PM cat si la BAT, s au schimbat managerii de proiect, cat si la ONG ul prin care derulam programul managerul de proiect si din dintre trainerii cu care lucrez, si acolo s au schimbat absolut toti. Q: Cel putin o data sau de mai multe ori? I.T.: Cel putin o data. Q: OK. Si cum crezi ca a afectat asta dinamica parteneriatului? I.T.: Nu pot sa zic ca a afectat parteneriatul, pentru ca eu am fost omul stabil, si atunci continuitatea ritmului, continuitatea strategica, a actiunilor a fost acolo. Deci omul care a pornit de la inceput a continuat sa dezvolte tools uri, iar ei au cont inuat sa investeasca in program, si mai mult decat atata, a crescut de la an la an. Q: OK, deci nu a afectat dinamica. Revin un picut la programul initial cand s a infiintat, voi ati fost contractati de catre PM initial? I.T.: Da, initial am fost contract ati de PM care la nivel social le era impus la nivel international, ca sa spun asa, sa dezvolte programe care sa asigure educatia tinerilor din toate tarile astfel in cat accesul lor la tigarete sa fie restrictionat. Am fost contractati sa gandim un astfel de program, noi am gandit programul ca atare si dupa aia am venit cu propunerea sa dezvoltam cu toate companiile partenere. El a inceput ca un pilot in 1999, asta insemnand ca a inceput la nivel de clasa a opta, in 10 scoli 8 In Bucuresti, doua din Ilfo v dupa care usor, usor s a extins la nivel national.

PAGE 122

122 Q: Ce rol au jucat copiii, parintii si profesorii beneficiarii parteneriatului in crearea si implementarea programului? Cum crezi ca a afectat asta programul? I.T.: Pai, initial, cei mai implicati au fost profesorii pentru ca inainte sa poata preda materialul mai departe copiilor, ei au fost trainuiti; trainingurile erau interactive, astfel incat observatiile lor au contribuit la nivelul de continut al matrialului educational; copiii au fost implic ati de la un moment dat incolo, adica de prin 2002, daca nu ma insel eu, cand au fost initiate un fel de concursuri creative pentru ei care s au finalizat cu niste tabere workshopuri in care si au spus si ei parearea despre continutul materialelor. Parin tii sunt implicati mai mult de doi ani incoace, de cand exista si un site. Pe site exista o sectiune speciala pentru parinti care este si interactiva. Q: OK. Ce rol a avut implicarea beneficiarilor pentru program? I.T.: Da, cu siguranta, a avut un rol bene fic pentru ca toate lucrurile gandite de psihologi au fost updatate in functie de feedback ul lor, astfel incat materialul final, sa spun asa, a corespuns cu ceea ce aveau ei nevoie de fapt. Q: Deci materialele au fost updatate in urma trainingulurilor cu profesorii, apoi au fost updatate in 2002, in urma feedback ului copiilor... I.T.: Exact Q: Care a fost relatia, daca a existat vreouna intre membrii actuali inainte de formarea parteneriatului? I.T.: Nu. Companiile producatoare de tigarete se cunosteau l a nivel de competitie, categoric, mai ales ca au probleme de legislatie comune. Nu se cunosteau cu psihologul sau cu reprezentantii ministerului Educatiei, cu Fundatia. Q: Am inteles. In acest caz, cine a propus structura parteneriatului? I.T.: Noi am prop us o. Deci tot programul: ca structura, ca parteneri, implementare, dezvoltare este gandit de noi. Q: Ok, am inteles. Deci a fost totul pe baza de propunere, potentialii parteneri au fost contactati, ei au acceptat si au intrat in program. I.T.: Exact. Q : Cum ai descrie nivelul de implicare al partenerilor si cum a evoluat pe parcurs? I.T.: La inceput erau mult mai activi cu siguranta, pana la momentul in care a devenit program national. Dupa aceea, au fost mai putin activi, poate si pentru ca s au schim bat oamenii de acolo dar si pentru ca mergea bine si

PAGE 123

123 n au vrut sa se mai implice pe strategie ci periodic pe chestii de continut. Dar clar la inceput s au implicat mult mai mult. Q: Mult mai mult ca timp, te referi? I.T.: Da, da, ca timp. Au fost destul de proportional implicati. Q: Ce mi poti spune despre resurse? Finantarea? I.T.: Nu, finantarea a crescut pe masura trecerii anilor. De acum trei ani incoace e cam acelasi buget, dar pana acum trei ani a fost o crestere in fiecare an, in functie de tools u rile pe care noi le am propus. Q: Ce resurse au alocat fundatia, ministerul? Ce fel de resurse au alocat? I.T.: Da, resurse umane pe tot parcursul programului, initial cand aveam actiuni multe pentru copii, clar si implicarea lor era mai mare. Acum fundati a e mai mult la nivel de... cum sa zic... noi suntem obligati prin lege sa desfasuram actiunea printr o fundatie ca sa fie absolut OK din punct de vedere legal pentru ca atat PM cat si BAT nu au voie sa faca lucruri pentru copii, atuncea fundatia are rolul de a oferi legitimitate din punctul asta de vedere. As adauga faptul ca niciun material care pleaca catre copii n are trecut pe el numele finantatorului, adica nici profesorii nu stiu cine este in spatele programului; ei stiu ca programul este derulat de o fundatie, cu suportul ministerului. Asta e o strategie de CSR intr adevar gandita astfel nu si cel care finanteaza, pentru awareness sau asa ceva. Q: Deci nu vorbim de interes e de imagine. I.T.: Nu Q : Dar beneficiile ministerului si ale fundatiei? I.T.: Da, fundatia chiar nu e de awareness, ei nu aveau alte programe similare pe care le deruleaza pentru tineri; iar ministerul este un partener foarte ok, pentru ca ne sustine de cativa ani, astfel incat programul a atins programa curriculara. Q: Cum ai descrie nivelul de implicare din punct de vedere al intensitatii comunicarii intre parteneri? I.T.: Comunicarea s a redus pe masura ce am implementat programul. Avem intalniri pero dice de strategie si updatare a lucrurilor, in rest comunicam doar la nivel de materiale sau daca apare o posibilitate noua de extindere, nu stiu, daca ne gandim noi la ceva care ni se pare destept. Dar intalnirea la care comunicam intens si mult e cea de strategie anuala o data, la inceput de an.

PAGE 124

124 Q: Acum te voi ruga sa identifici dupa parerea ta cine este liderul, coordonatorul si I.T.: Vezi cum esti? Pai liderul cred ca suntem no i, coordonatorul tot noi iar purtatorul de cuvant este ministerul. Q: Care sunt atributiile lor? Practic tot rolul vostru pe care mi l ai descris la inceputul interviului se plica aici: facilitarea dialogului, coordonarea activitatilor, designul tools uril or. Dar ministerul in calitate de purtator de cuvant? I.T.: Ministerul si fundatia care nu are greutate atat de mare dau legitimitate programului, deci ei sunt cei care pot vorbi publicului extern despre program. Q: Cum au fost stabilite obiectivele pa rteneriatului la inceput? I.T.: Noi le am propus si pe urma le am definitivat impreuna cu finantatorii. Q: OK. Si doar le ati comunicat celorlalti parteneri? I.T.: Lantul trofic, sa zic asa, a fost noi catre finantatori, definitivare, propunere mai depart e, si, dupa feedback de la ei modificare, astfel incat sa coincida si cu interesele lor pe termen lung, nu numai cu ale noastre. Q: Obiectivele fiecarui membru implicat pe masura ce ati facut propunerile, nu? I.T.: Exact. Q: In ce masura crezi ca au refl ectat aceste obiective interesele individuale ale membrilor? PM si BAT de fapt mi ai zis, e problema de CSR si de prevenire a fumatului juvenil. I.T.: Da Q: Dar ale celorlati parteneri? I.T.: Pentru minister a fost creat intr un moment in care din punct de vedere politic, la nivel de minister, aveau probleme de vizibilitate, legitimitate, credibilitate fata de ce faceau la nivel national ca platforma educationala, in 2000 2001. Si atunci programul asta a venit tocmai cand se definitivau politicile educati onale legate de curricular extracurricular, cel fel de programe ar trebui incluse in ultima categorie; iar programul asta se plia pe ideea de consilieri in scoli, ori ideea asta abia aparea atunci la noi in Romania. Programul acesta a fost gandit pentru ora de dirigentie si acesti consilieri au inceput sa comunice mai bine cu copiii. Si atunci programul s a pliat pe nevoia lor de a avea acesti consilieri in scoli, astfel

PAGE 125

125 incat a fost o situatie win win. Si pentru noi a fost exact ce vroiam, si pentru ei a fost exact ce le trebuia. Pentru fundatie, ca beneficii de imagine sincer nu vad foarte multe, au ramas in echipa de la inceput fiindca, daca ar fi logic, ei ca obiective nu au programe educationale pentru adolescenti. Q: Cum a fost gestionata comunicare a de a lungul timpului? Directa? Mediata? I.T.: A evoluat, cum am evoluat de noi. La inceput ne intalneam in fiecare luna cu toti partenerii, discutam ce se mai intampla, etc.; acuma ne intalnim o data de doua ori pe an maxim, in rest e comunicare pe tel efon sau pe mail; direct a ramas doar pentru lucrurile foarte importante care se stabilesc la inceput de an si pentru diverse activitati punctuale: daca e o conferinta de presa, normal ca ne intalnim inainte sa discutam; daca e vorba doar despre o noua dis tributie de materiale, de exemplu, vorbim la telefon. Q: Cand te referi la intalnirile actuale, participa toata lumea ministerul, fundatia, BAT, PM, voi, d na Liiceanu, etc.? I.T.: Da, intalnirile anuale toata lumea si mai des noi ministerul, noi finant atorii, noi psihologii, noi fundatia. Q: Deci voi sunteti elementul comun, am inteles. I.T.: Da, iar intalnirea anuala se intampla teoretic cu toata lumea, cu toti partenerii. Q: Ce mi poti spune despre barierele de comunicare de a lungul timpului cauzate poate de diferentele dintre parteneri? Da mi, te rog, cateva exemple. I.T.: Sa stii ca nu prea am ce sa ti zic legat de bariere de comunicare. In afara de experientele de dinainte de intalnirile cu presa unde bariera de comunicare era la nivel de.. cum sa zic... proceduri, minister si vizibilitate, bariere de comunicare n au fost. Adica asta e un exemplu de parteneriat linistit, ca sa zic asa. Q: Deci nu au fost probleme legate de cultura organizationala NGO versus companii private, de exemplu? I.T.: Nu, nu. Q: OK. Ce mi poti spune despre distributia puterii ca nivel de decizie? I.T.: Pai la nivel de resurse financiare, vorbim de finantatori, dar la nivel de continut puterea de decizie e impartita intre psiholog, min ister. La nivel de tipuri de lucruri care se intampla e impartita intre noi agentia si

PAGE 126

126 finantatori. Adica daca vine o propunere de la finatator catre noi, noi le putem spune, nu, nu e cazul, nu la acest moment. Q: Care sunt rezultatele parteneriatului? I.T.: Pai e un pic mai complicat aici. Rezultatul este cuantificabl ca numar de profesori care implementeaza programul si ca numar de copii care beneficiaza. De ce spuneam ca este complicat, el este pilot inceput acum 11 ani, cu un numar mic de elevi, c are s a extins treptat la nivel national si de curricula; adica la inceput era extracurricular, a devenit curricular intre timp; la inceput a fost pentru clasa a opta, apoi pentru a saptea si a opta, si in final pentru intregul ciclu gimnazial, si atunci e foarte greu de cuantificat. Dar la nivel de continut a fost pe feedback categoric, intra pe site, pe forumuri, comenteaza. Q: Dar daca vorbim de beneficiile partenerilor? Am inteles ca PM si BAT n au avut beneficii de imagine, dar au avut alte tipuri de b eneficii? I.T.: Nu. Adica acuma, mercantil vorbind, ei sunt obligati prin lege sa deruleze astfel de programe. Dar daca nu ar fi implicati si nu le ar pasa de program, daca n ar fi implicati mai mult emotional decat financiar, cred ca s ar putea limita la a tipari cateva materiale o data la 5 ani si ar fi acceptabil in punct de vedere legal. Q: Daca ar fi sa faci o lista cu factorii contributori la succesul acestui parteneriat care ar fi? I.T.:Entuziasmul de inceput al nostru, al PM si al BAT a contribuit foarte tare la dezvoltarea ulterioara a programului; pentru ca la inceput stateam cu managerii de proiect din zi si pana in noapte pana puneam la punct lucrurile; iar acest entuziasm si implicare maxima la inceput a fost foarte important. Apoi cred ca a c ontribuit foarte tare faptul ca ministerul a fost intr adevar un partener pe care ne am putut baza care ne a ajutat in demersurile pe care le am facut pentru extinderea la nivel national. Categoric. A fost foarte de ajutor acea tabara de creatie facuta la un moment dat pentru copii pentru ca ne a dat sentimentul ca da, e util, da, e bun, si merita continuarea programului in perspectiva. Si dincolo de asta, da, e important ca banii continua sa vina. Pentru ca daca finantarea s ar opri, degeaba am fi noi entu ziasmati. Q: Si daca te referi la parteneriatul in sine, la cum ati functionat voi impreuna, care ar fi factorii, pe langa entuziasm, pe care l ai mentionat? I.T.: Da, entuziasmul, consecventa. Faptul ca la finantatori au fost oameni care au continuat indi ferent c a fost iarna, vara. Consecventa, clar.

PAGE 127

127 In depth interview, February 2, 2011 A.D: Ro lul meu a fost de coordin ator al programului de preventie a fumatului juvenile din partea Philip Morris; pentru ca, dupa cum stiti, parteneriatul presupunea ratificarea atat a PM Romania cat si a British American Tobacco a fost un joint venture de la inceput. M am ocupat de aces t program din 1998 pana la jumatatea lui 2008 cand am plecat din companie. 10 ani. Q : OK. In per ioada in care ati fost implicata cei 10 ani in ce masura s au schimbat oamenii din partea organizatiilor membre ? A.D: Am avut ca parteneri pe de o parte cu finantatorii ca sa va explic care a fost structura parteneriatului in primul rand i am avut ca parteneri, sau cofinantatori, pe cei de la BAT Romania si am lucrat impreuna cu Fundatia pentru Pluralism, una dintre fundatiile care lucreaza foarte mult pe educatie si este destul de cunoscuta in Romania si are un track record foarte bun. Asta a fost structura parteneriatului, parteneriat care in timp a avut o colaborare colaterala si cu Ministerul Educatiei si Invatamantului. In afara de Ministerul Educatie i, care a semnat pana la urma un parteneriat cu noi, au mai fost implicati Ministerul Tineretului si Ministerul Sanatatii. Ei s au retras la un moment dat pentru ca Organizatia Mondiala a Sanatatii nu le a mai permis sa partenerieze cu firme care produc tu tun. Q: OK, deci sa verific daca am inteles bine: deci inainte sa se implice Ministerul Educatiei ati fost parteneri cu Ministerul Tineretului si Ministerul Sanatatii? Iar cand s a retras Ministerul Sanatatii a intrat Ministerul Educatiei? A.D.: Nu, Minist erul Educatiei a fost tot timpul. Pentru ca rolul Ministerului Educatiei este de a permite accesul echipei de psihologi si de consilieri pe care ii formeaza Fundatia pentru Pluralism sa formeze oameni din interiorul sistemului. Pentru ca nu eu, ca reprezen tant al PM Romania si nici colegii mei de la BAT nu intram personal in scoli. Programul este construit de psihologi cu renume in Romania pe partea de psihologie juvenila si este introdus in scoli prin intermediul ariei curriculare de consiliere; si noi am format profesori in spiritul programului. Q: OK. In ce masura s au schimbat oamenii din partea organizatiilor pe parcurs? Cum credeti ca au afectat aceste schimbari dinamica parteneriatului? A.D.: Elementele stabile au fost eu, pe de o parte, si reprezen tantii din partea Fundatiei pentru Pluralism, ca si psihologii care au scris programul si

PAGE 128

128 pe urma l au updatat, l au testat, l au imbunatatit si l au adus la ce este el la ora actuala. Astea sunt elementele fixe. Q: Cand va referiti la Fundatie, va referi ti la Doamna Petrescu si la Doamna Popa? A.D: Exact. Cat despre psihologii care au fost amasati de catre Fundatie ca sa scrie materialele si sa conduca sesiunile de formare ale profesorilor diriginti si ale profesorilor psihologi si consilieri din scoli, a fost Aurora Liiceanu tot timpul si Andrei Popescu in prima parte a programului pana in 2007 cand am inceput sa reformulam si sa extindem ceea ce pana atunci a numit programul, dupa accea numele schi mbandu si s a extins din 2008. Q: Deci sa inteleg ca de la BAT s au mai schimbat membrii? A.D.: Da. Q: Si de la minister la fel. A.D: Da. Q: Cum credeti ca au afectat aceste schimbari dinamica parteneriatului? A.D.: In nici un fel, pentru ca, de exemplu, coordonatorii programului din partea BAT e adevarat ca s au schimbat; in schimb sefii lor, adica directorul de corporate affairs de la BAT a ramas acelasi. Deci nu au fost niste schimbari care sa afecteze in vreun fel program ul sau finantarea sau buna colaborare dintre cele doua companii pe chestiunea asta care este non concurentiala si care face parte din obiectivele de corporate affairs si de CSR ale ambelor firme. Q: Dar day by day oamenii implicati au fost cei din middle m anagement sau sefii de departament? A.D.: Middle managemement, da. Q: Deci practic raportul s a facut catre esaloanele inalte. OK. A.D: Da, da. Q: Imi puteti spune va rog ce rol au jucat parintii, copiii si profesorii targetul acestui parteneriat in cr earea si implementarea programului? Ce impact a avut acest rol sau lipsa lui asupra programului? A.D: Primul si cel mai important rol l au avut profesorii pe care Ministerul Educatiei i a selectat si i a dat spre formare. Am avut de partea noastra

PAGE 129

129 psiholo gii angajati de catre Fundatia pentru Pluralism care au avut multi ani la rand sesiuni de formare cu profesori din sitemul de invatamant. S au tinut seminarii, s au tinut congrese, s au dat materiale materialele programului se adreseaza profesorilor, nu copiilor direct iar profesorii sunt practic primii purtatori de mesaj in contact direct cu beneficiarul care este elevul. Psihologii nu au intrat niciodata la clasa, decat sa supravegheze din cand in cand la ore metodice sau metodologice, iar noi ca fina ntatori am stat departe de scoala, am primit numai reultate de sondaj, am avut testari, am facut revizuri aproape 6 ani de zile pana si a capatat o forma finala si pana cand s a atins masa critica de profesori inscrisi in program si formati in asa fel inca t sa ne asiguram ca exista o reprezentativitate la nivel national a acestei materii. Si dupa sase ani am avut o victorie foarte importanta, si anume acest program a intrat in curriculum national, la aria curriculara de consiliere, adica si pe orele de diri gentie si pe orele de consiliere; curriculul la alegerea scolii, aceasta este prevederea din contractul pe care l am reinnoit dupa sase ani cu Ministerul Educatiei. Q: Profesorii sau copiii au fost ei consultati despre problematica respectiva? In crearea manualului, in trainiguri, au avut ei un rol in continut? A.D: Da, da, da. In primul rand, materialul a fost facut dupa focus grupuri si dupa un studiu de problematica si zone de interes pentru elevi si pentru profesorii diriginti la nivel national. A fos t un esantion la nivel national de vreo 1200 de copii, daca nu ma insel, si vreo 400 si ceva de profesori; asta se intampla in 1998. Am facut un studiu, dupa care, conform rezultatelor obtinute in urma studiului, s au apucat cei doi psihologi sa scrie prim ul manual. Dupa care testarile au continuat; la sfarsitului fiecarui an scolar s au aplicat chestionare atat profesorilor care predau conform materiei prevazute in manualul nostru cat si copiilor care au beneficiat de program versus segmente / esantioana m artor din clase in care programul nu a functionat, ca sa detectam eventuale diferente de comportament si imbunatatiri sau grade de interes fata de materia predata. Q: Si materialele au fost updatate in functie de rezultate. A.D; Da, materialele au suferit multiple schimbari datorita acestor rezultate ale focus grupurilor si sondajelor aplicate in toate grupele de copii care au timp, pana s o singura varianta. In momentul in care am parasit compania si s a 2008, deja era o extindere, un pas inainte catre primele doua clase de liceu. Q: Perfect. A.D. : Deci noi am tratat acest program ca pe un organism viu. L am adaptat de cate ori a fost nevoie, de cate ori am descoperit ca exista subiecte care

PAGE 130

130 n au fost atinse, sau subiecte care au fost prea putin atinse conform reactiei copiilor si conform reactiilo r profesorilor consilieri care lucrau dupa acesta metoda. Q: Exista rapoarte ale acestor focus grupuri? A.D.: Sigur, exista la fundatie. Ei au o parte din rezultate, mai exista o parte din rezultate care se afla la Aurora Liiceanu. Q: A existat o relatie intre parteneri inainte de formarea parteneriatului? Cum s a ajuns la structura lui? Daca da, credeti ca a avut un rol in sudura parteneriatului? A.D: Cu cei de la fundatie am facut cunostinta prin recomandarea uneia dintre agentiile noastre de relatii pu blice. Q: Image Promotion? A.D.:Pe vremea aia 1998 aveam doua agentii care se ocupau pe partea asta de programe de educatie: Image Promotion si Young & Rubicam. Dupa doi ani, Y&R a iesit din peisaj si a ramas doar Image. Deci fundatia ne a fost recom andata de ei, iar contactele la nivelul ministerelor le am facut direct ducandu ne acolo si intreband la inspectoratul general am cunoscut o pe doamna Calugaru si care ne a fost de mare ajutor, ea fiind unul dintre oamenii cei mai deschisi la genul asta de parteneriat si nu este indiferent modul in care intri sa testezi sau sa imbunatatesti o materie sau alta. Dar ea ne a fost de mare folos din punctul asta de vedere. Ea este unul din oamenii din minister din esalonul trei, ca anvergura, in structura minist erului inspector general pe politici educationale. Q: Am inteles. Cum ati descrie nivelul de implicare al partenerilor in program si cum a evoluat el pe parcurs? Ca timp, resurse, interese organizationale, intensitatea comunicarii. A.D.: Eu cred ca am avut destul de mult, cum sa spun eu, noroc. Datorita faptului ca programul este conceput de doi psihologi absolut bine vazuti si fara probleme, si cu opere de anvergura in societatea romaneasca, recomandarile lor precum si lucrul direct al lor cu educatori i din minister si cu profesorii si cu profesorii consilieri au dictat directia programului. Noi, ce doi finantatori, am cautat sa sprijinim demersul pentru ca ni s a parut de o calitate incontestabila si ni s a parut ca adreseaza exact problemele reale ale segmentului vizat de noi prin acest program. Daca solutia propusa de psihologi si agreata de Minister ar fi fost una mai discutabila, probabil ca am fi avut diferente de implicare. Dar nu. Din cauza ca a fost un lucru bun, in care a crezut de la inceput t oata lumea, si un lucru bine executat, un lucru bine gandit, totul a mers foarte ok. Deci nu am avut probleme nici cu dimensionarea programului, care sa genereze la noi probleme de finantare, el a crescut intr un mod firesc si natural si nu ne am trezit pe ste noapte ca

PAGE 131

131 trebuie sa triplam bugete, deci n am avut probleme antagonizante cu partea creativa si partea vie a programului; iar pe cealalta parte, beneficiarul, care este profesorul diriginte si profesorul consilier, a fost asa de multumit incat practic nu am avut probleme nici la Ministerul Educatiei din acest punct de vedere. A fost o colaborare foarte buna, altfel n ar fi durat atat vreme. Altfel ar fi fost restructurari majore si s ar fi schimbat directia. Dar nu a fost cazul, pentru ca a fost un luc ru bun si un lucru care functioneaza, tocmai pen t ru ca adreseaza niste nevoi reale. Q: Dupa parearea dumneavoastra cine este liderul acestui parteneriat? Cine este coordonatorul? Si cine este purtatorul de cuvant? A.D.: Rolul de initiator revine PM, pent ru ca noi am facut propunerea care a fost acceptata de BAT; noi am participat ceva mai activ si ceva mai sprinten si ceva mai determinat pentru perioada de inceput decat colaboratorii nostri. Q: Colaboratorii corporatisti? A.D.: Cofinantatorii, BAT. Dar in timp s au convins si ei ca este un lucru foarte OK si n au mai avut retineri, si n au mai pus intrebari foarte multe si au cooperat foarte bine. Si cred ca asta se trage din faptul ca cei doi psihologi au facut treaba foarte buna. Q: OK, deci liderul part eneriatului a fost PM? A.D: Cu siguranta. Q: Dar coordonatorul? A.D: Din partea PM, am fost eu. Ca sa intelegeti de ce spun ca liderul si accentul mai hotarator pentru program apartine PM, este pentru ca aproape patru ani de zile titulatura mea a fost Yout h Smoking Prevention Coordinator. Ma mai ocupam si de alte lucruri, dar asta era aria numarul 1 care conta in evaluarea mea anuala ca profesionist. Iar pe partea de comunicare, sa zicem ca am fost ceva mai activi decat partenerii nostri de la BAT, dar am c omunicat din perspectiva programului, n am comunicat fara sa i includem. Q: Si ati avut si agentia de relatii publice, nu? A.D.: Da, agentia de PR care facea bugete, ne organiza congresele, seminariile. Q: Deci partea tehnica, ca sa spun asa, nu neaparat strategica? A.D: Strategia a stat intotdeauna la PM si intr o oarecare masura si la BAT.

PAGE 132

132 Q: Si purtatorul de cuvant? A.D: O foarte buna parte din timp am fost eu, iar la inceput, a fost seful meu care era directorul de corporate affairs pe vremea aia, Pet er Imre (un an de zile). Q: Cand va referiti la purtatorul de cuvant, va referiti la publicul extern, cine vorbea despre parteneriat cu publicul general? A.D.: Cu presa in primul rand; in al doilea rand cu publicul interesat din zona specializata: programu l asta a avut si o componenta evidenta de lobby la nivel de institutii ale statului care trebuiau si ele angrenate, care trebuiau sa inteleaga care este amplitudinea, care este avnergura programului, care sunt utilitatile programului, pentru ca pana la urm a trebuie sa demonstrezi ca adresezi o problema reala, ca produci niste efecte benefice si ca merita continuat. Iar partea asta de lobby am facut o eu, si de la un moment dat eu impreuna cu BAT ul. Dar mainly eu. Q: Cum au fost stabilite obiectivele parten eriatului la inceput? Cine le a definit? Au fost negociate de membri sau le ati propus dumneavoastra? Cum s au mulat ele dupa obiectivele individuale ale membrilor? A.D.: E destul de simplu. Atat in prioritatile de CSR ale PM, cat si ale BAT, exista acest a parte de educatie anti fumat, de prevenire a fumatului juvenil; si principiile pe care compania le aplica, le aplica destul de uniform in toate pietele in care activeaza. Fie finanteaza programe deja existente aici nu era nici unul fie creaza program e cum a fost cazul romanesc fie se agata la programe existente ale ministerelor, nu neaparat ale organizatiilor non guvernamentale nici asta nu a fost cazul in Romania. Drept pentru care prioritatile strategice, de a concepe un program, a l testa, a i face lobby in cadrul institutiilor ca sa avem autorizare ca sa intram in scoli cu programul au decurs de la sine. E adevarat ca de negociat, negociem la modul ca cei doi psihologi veneau cu propuneri, cum s ar adresa, care sunt pasii pe partea de actio n plan sa zicem, si time line si buget, se uneau la un loc cu fundatia si cu agentia de PR si ei veneau cu action plan ul asortat cu bugetele estimative. Dupa care noi si cu BAT ul stateam si spuneam ne o putem au fost negocieri majore care sa tina programul in loc sau care sa ii afecteze in vreun fel structura sau dinamica. Q: Voiam doar sa verific, inainte de a trece mai departe, ca am inteles corect unu l dintre raspunsurile dumneavoasta. Functia de Youth Smoking Prevention Coordinator a fost la inceputul programului si dupa aceea a fost Manager Corporate Affairs?

PAGE 133

133 A.D.: Exact. Pentru ca functia mea se largise, ma ocupam si de relatii guvernamentale nu num ai pe chestiunea asta, si daca se marise profilul jobului, a fost schimbata si titulatura. Dar ca sa vedeti cat de prioritar era pentru PM acest youth smoking prevention exista o functie, pe care eu o ocupam, care chiar asa se numea. Q: Cum a fost gestion ata comunicarea intre parteneri de alungul timpului? Directa versus mediata de alungul timpului? A.D.: Bineinteles ca la inceput ne intalneam mai des. Dar n am scazut niciodata ritmicitatea sub doua intalniri pe luna. Pentru ca programul este destul de co mplex, cuprinde foarte multi parteneri care toata lumea trebuie sa stie unul de altul si e normal sa ne intalnim face to face in definitiv, eram toti in Bucuresti. Fundatia se intalnea in fiecare saptamana atat cu psihologii cat si cu profesori, iar noi in calitate de coordonatori ai programului din punct de vedere financiar strategic, ne intalneam o data pe luna, ca sa tragem concluzii, sa stabilim necesitati si sa vedem care sunt progresele. Plus ca, bineinteles, in parte de comunicare a programului, conferintele de presa in care anuntam implementarea programului, in al doilea rand, diversele etape de extinderi, sau schimbari fundamentale, sau lucruri interesante care au aparut pe parcursul programului si comunicarea asta necesita intalniri intre par ti ca sa punem la punct care sunt mesajele programului, astfel incat sa avem o singura voce. Q: Cand ati spus de cele doua intalniri pe luna in medie, va refereati la toti cei 10 ani? Sau mai mult la inceput? A.D: Nu, la toti cei 10 ani cat am fost eu impl icata. Q: Si in restul timpului, comunicarea a fost mediata? A.D: Da, da, sigur ca da, e mail, telefon, pentru stabilirea activitatilor day by day. Q: Intensitatea comunicarii a ramas constanta in timpul asta? A.D.: Da, deci asta era media, pe diverse subi ecte: pe new development, pe extinderi sau pe ongoing business. Q: Si participau toti membrii parteneriatului? A.D.: Nu, cu ministerul ne intalneam la 6 8 saptamani, deci cam la o luna jumate, doua. Fie mergeam la doamna Calugaru, fie o mai aduceam pe dumn eaei la intalnirile noastre sau la diverse intalniri cu profesorii in asa fel incat sa ne asiguram ca ministerul intelege exact in toate momentele ce se intampla si care sunt lucrurile importante de retinut despre program. Q: Deci ei erau singurii care er au ceva mai rar implicati in discutii?

PAGE 134

134 neaparat ce sa spuna pentru ca intre noi si minister, in afara de faptul de proiectul era finantat de noi, nu a existat o legatura baneasca; noi nu p lateam profesorii, numai i am format cu acordul ministerului. Ce plateam noi erau toate inchirierile de sali pentru seminarii, pentru sesiunile de formare, catering uri; asta de intampla o data pe an, vara, timp de o saptamana. Din cauza asta, ministerul n u avea foarte multe lucruri de aflat, sau de hotarat. Bucataria noastra interna, toata logistica si toata nebunia, s a intamplat cu Fundatia si cu agentia de PR. Q: Va rog sa mi dati cateva exemple de bariere de comunicare intre parteneri in masura in ca re au existat. Apoi va rog sa mi spuneti cum au fost ele gestionate. A.D: Am avut aproape o bariera de comunicare cu Ministerul Educatiei la esaloanele lui mai inalte; deci nu la nivelul oamenilor care veneau in contact direct cu noi si care intelegeau de spre ce e vorba, ci la nivelul de secretar de stat si de ministru dar asta a fost numai la inceput. De ce? Pentru ca oamenii aveau reticente pe care pot sa le inteleg ca vine cineva din afara sistemlui, ca e vorba de niste producatori de tutun implic ati, ei n au inteles foarte bine care este implicarea noastra si cred ca le a fost teama la un moment dat sa nu se trezeasca ca reprezentantii nostri o sa participe in clase, dar astea s au dizolvat in timp... si este firesc sa se intample asa... pentru c a oamenii cand vad incep sa inteleaga. Cum sa spun eu, am incercat pe de o parte sa i facem pe ce din Minister sa citeasca materialele respective, manualul si documentatia. Pentru ca raspunsul e acolo. Materialul este de foarte mare calitate, raspunde unor necesitati absolut evidente si firesti; in plus i am rugat sa mearga la lectii deschise, ceea ce au si facut. Din momentul ala au inceput sa se relaxeze in ceea ce priveste utilitatea si faptul ca e un program binevenit pentru sistem, si n am mai avut pro bleme. Bine, n am avut probleme propriu zise, dar stiti cum e cu reticenta. Dar totul s a rezolvat destul de ok in timp, vazand si facand. Si, ca dovada, dupa sase ani, s a semnat introducerea programului in curriculum national. Deci a fost semnul depasiri i acestei bariere. Q: In tot acest timp, dumneavoastra ati fost cea care a vorbit cu ministerul, cea care a fost implicata direct? Sau prin agentia de PR? A.D.: Ca sa intelegeti un aspect foarte punctual: companiile de tutun, atunci cand angajeaza agentii de comunicare, acele agentii nu au acelasi rol pe care l ar avea de exemplu daca ar fi angajati de Coca Cola. De ce? Pentru ca daca eu, reprezentant al PM Romania, vreau sa dau un comunicat de presa despre soarta programului nu stiu care... comunicatul ala il scriu eu, mi l aproba sefii mei de la headquarters, iar agentia eventual il distribuie, dar 90% dintre cazuri noi faceam asta. Este o industrie supusa unui public speaking destul de puternic. Comunicarea se face in house, iar agentia de

PAGE 135

135 PR se ocupa de partea de logistica: aduna oamenii, inchiriaza sali, pune flori pe masa, aduce presa, face follow up si monitorizarea; dar continutul comunicarii este intotdeauna facut in house. Q: Deci strategiile in house si implementarea este lasata in mare parte in ag entie. A.D.: Da. Q: Rezultatele la nivel social mi ati spus ca in fiecare an se conduc chestionare, focus grupuri A.D.: Exact. Liana si Aurora va pot spune mai multe. Q: Referindu ne la rezultate, dar din punct de vedere al beneficiilor obtinute de parte neri, ca membri ai acestui parteneriat, ce puteti sa mi spuneti? A.D.: Beneficiul... este un lucru hotarat de conducerea companiei ca trebuie sa ne implicam si cerut de publicul larg, ca cei care se implica in prevenirea fumatului juvenil sa fie si reprez entanti ai industriei tutunului. Deci asta este un principiu de baza al activitatii pe partea de CSR al companiei PM si, in general, al companiilor de tutun. Beneficiul este faptul ca companiile de tutun cel putin PM vor sa fie vazute ca parte a soluti ei, nu ca parte a problemei. Fundatia a avut timp de 10 ani de zile un program de succes pe care l a derulat si care la randul lui a atras alte programe si i a acordat o vizibilitate mai mare. Cei doi psihologi au avut ocazia ca cercetarile lor si proicetu l asta sa fie finantat si ocazia de a avea finatare pentru una dintre ideile lor cele mai bune si mai ok de implementat si mai prioritare. Au avut intelegere de la PM si BAT, sprijin din partea Fundatiei, sprijin logi stic din partea agentiei de PR. Deci asta ar fi un avantaj pentru ei: este un proiect de cercetare, daca vreti, care a functionat mai bine decat altele. Ministerul, din punctul meu de vedere, are beneficiul clar ca exista o investitie uriasa cam $ 500,00 0 pe an alocati nu pentru minister, ci pentru lucruri utile pentru minister, adica pentru elevi. Adica vine cineva si iti aduce un program de calitate, un program pe termen lung iar astea sunt mult mai greu de gasit plus oameni de calitate, verificat i, si asa mai departe. Q: PM a folosit acest parteneriat pentru imagine si reputatie? Au comunicat publicului fapul ca sunt finantaorii programului sau nu? A.D.: Sigur ca da, s a comunicat pentru ca intotdeauna am crezut ca puterea exemplului va genera cev a mai multa activitate in acest sens. Pentru ca in Romania, una dintre trasaturile principale ale programelor educationale este faptul ca sunt atomizate, nu sunt finatate pe termen lung, nu sunt gandite in perspectiva; si nu ma refer doar la programele min isterului, ma refer si la NGO uri, la toate lumea. Acesta a fost un

PAGE 136

136 contraexemplu la cum se face treaba in Romania de obicei. Fundatiile lucreaza ca si cand se concureaza. Exista fundatii care strang bani si fac programe mici, mici, pe tema SIDA, copiilor abandonati, pe toate temele posibile. Asta in loc sa existe o coordonare si o centralizare si o viziune. Acesta era un program bine coordonat, care avea o viziune si un viitor si o constanta ceea ce e total atipic pentru ceea ce se intampla in peisajul r omanesc. Deci iata ca se poate. Q: Singurii carora nu le ati comunicat au fost probabil copiii? A.D.: Nu, n am avut niciodata contact cu scolile, elevii sau profesorii. Q: Aceasta componenta s a desfasurat prin Fundatie? A.D.: Da. Q: Ultima intrebare: Daca ar fi sa faceti o lista cu factorii care au contribuit la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi? A.D.: In primul rand, calitatea muncii psihologilor, autorii programului. Incontestabil. In al doilea rand, faptul ca parteneriatul pe partea de finantare chiar a functionat, ne am inteles bine si ne am angrenat ca opinii, startegie, si timing. Apoi numarul trei ar fi faptul ca fundatia si agentia au conclucrat bine si s au miscat repede, astfel incat toata partea de logistica a fost livrata la timp de fiec are data, cantitativ si calitativ; au avut niste standarde foarte bune; o implementare extraordinara. Q: Dar daca ne referim la interactiunea dintre participanti? Care au fost cei mai importanti factori care v au mentinut impreuna? A.D.: Foarte multa pers everenta. Pentru ca exista riscul ca la un moment dat, cand vorbim de programe mamut de genul asta, care dureaza de multi ani si nu si propun sa se termine niciodata, intervine o relaxare si o plictiseala sau blazare. De data asta n a intervenit pentru ca eu am fost unul dintre motoarele parteneriatului care a fost si elementul stabil ca e important un om care stie despre ce e vorba, care are in cap istoricul si care stie sa umble acolo unde trebuie. Un alt factor a fost Fundatia care a avut un rol de neg ociere permanenta intre profesorii consilieri, cei implicati de minister ca potentiali candidati pentru programul nostru, la fel relatia cu psihologii si relatia cu agentia cu PR; apoi agentia de PR a avut un rol hotarator pentru ca desi toata lumea cade i n plasa ideii ca lucrurile importante sunt strategia si banii si cam atat, ei bine, nu, munca de zi cu zi, lucrat la bugete, produs tricouri, pixuri, aliniatul tuturor planetelor pentru conferintele de presa, corectitudinea materialelor, relatia cu tipogra fia, distribuirea materialelor in sistem, in teritoriu. E foarte important, desi e un aspect destul de greu de vazut: ca munca gospodinei in casa. Si lumea de foarte buna calitate: a fost o coincidenta fericita oameni de foarte buna

PAGE 137

137 calitate din partea t uturor partilor implicate. Manualul este cheia succesului lobby ului pe care l am facut la autoritati. In 90% din famiile romanesti cu copiii nu vorbeste nimeni. Despre comunicarea cu adultii, despre problemele varstei. Rezultatele vorbesc clar: surpriza p lacuta pe care o au copiii in momentul in care li se deschid astfel de lucruri de discutat si efectele senzationale asupra notelor lor la invatatura, notelor la purtare exista diferente notabile intre clasele care au participat la program si clasele car e nu au beneficiat de program. Exista diferente palpabile si masurabile. Asta voiam sa adaug: este un program senzational, cred in el si este unul dintre foarte putinele lucruri facute cu cap si cu coada in peisajul educational romanesc. Si nu vreau sa bla mez ministerul, dar asta este starea generala. Dincolo de orice, de perceptia ca de la companiile de tutun nu poate sa vina nimic bun, asta este unul dintre contraexemple: un lucru foarte bine facut, necesar, si frumuos in sine, care functioneaza. In dept h interview, February 3, 2011 Q: Spuneti L.P.: Eu sunt directoarea Fundatiei pentru Pluralism si sunt implicata de cand a incep ut programul. Q: Deci din 1998. L.P.: Da. Q: Ce rol ati avut dumneavoastra in parteneriat din partea fundatiei? L.P.: Noi am pus la dispozitie cadrul organizational; am fost partenerul, ca sa zic asa, nonprofit fost interfata de comunicare intre finantator si beneficiar. Q: Deci intre companiile de tutun si copii, profesori. L.P.: Da. Q: Pe perioada celor 12 ani de cand sunteti implicata, in ce masura s a schimbat componenta parteneriatului? Ma refer la organizat iile implicate si la reprezentantii din partea organizatiilor. Si cum credeti ca aceste schimbari au afectat dinamica parteneriatului?

PAGE 138

138 L.P.: Din cate stiu eu, nu s a schimbat parteneriatul, a ramas acelasi, intre Fundatia pentru Pluralism si finantatori s i intre Fundatia pentru Pluralism si beneficiar. Deci nu au intervenit modificari privind alte organizatii implicate. Singura diferenta majora este ca in al doilea an deja a fost implicat Ministerul Educatiei, prin urmare tot programul a avut ca partener s i Ministerul Educatiei. Q: Am inteles ca ministerul a introdus programul in curriculum abia dupa sase ani. L.P.: Asta e altceva. Dar fara ajutorul ministerului de la inceput noi nu am fi putut sa intram in scoli sau sa putem identifica profesorii; deci nu aveam cum altfel decat cu implicarea directa a ministerului. Evident, manualul a fost implementat dupa niste ani de munca, nu numaidecat. Q: Ati spus ceva de intrat in scoli, de ales profesori. Care a fost procedura? Inteleg ca asta tine de rolul dumneavoa stra. L.P.: Deja intrati in niste amanunte. Deci noi am organizat traininguri cu profesorii, dupa ce am avut initial acceptul scolilor, iar dupa aceea o lista intreaga de la Ministerul Invatamantului. Q: Am inteles. Lista de la minister si traininguri cu profesorii. OK, deci am inteles ca organizatiile partenere nu s au schimbat. Dar oameni din partea lor? Dumneavoastra ati vorbit cu aceeasi oameni timp de 12 ani? L.P.: Nu, reprezentantii sigur s au mai schimbat, mai ales in companii, dar si la minister, b ineinteles. Q: Si credeti ca schimbarea oamenilor..? L.P.: Nu, nu, a fost OK, absolut OK, adica nu a influentat negativ, indiferent de schimbare. Oamenii au stiut exact ce au de facut si nu au fost probleme, niciun fel de probleme, programul a decurs abso lut profesionist de toate partile. Q: Ce rol au jucat mai exact parintii, copiii si profesorii, deci beneficiarii, in crearea si implementarea programului? In ce masura au fost consultati, in ce momente, prin ce metode? L.P.: Aici ar fi foarte multe de exp licat. Q: Va rog... L.P.: .... dar nu vad la ce va ajuta la un studiu. Q: Ma ajuta pentru ca..

PAGE 139

139 L.P.: Noi am facut un fel de traininguri pentru profesori. Q: Puteti sa dezvoltati? Pentru ca ma ajuta detaliile legate de procesul de implicare a beneficiarilor in proiect. L.P.: Nu, deci imi pare rau, detaliile sunt, ca sa zic asa, apanajul celor care sunt implicati in program, deci eu nu pot sa va vand programul. Eu va spun exact care a fost contributia noastra, in rest nu cred ca.. Q: Contributia dumneavoastra a fost si sa faceti studii de caz cu profesorii? L.P.: Contributia noastra a fost sa organizam toate acestea, ceea ce nu e putin lucru deloc. Q: Nu e putin lucru cu siguranta. Numai ca ma interesa sa intram un pic in detalii legate de inputul din partea b eneficiarilor. L.P.: Nu, nu, deci detalii despre felul in care am procedat ca sa... deja e strategie organizationala si nu pot sa vorbesc mai multe. Q: OK L.P.: Adica desi suntem o fundatie, avem si noi o strategie ca orice firma, sa stiti, deci chiar daca nu avem profit. Q: Bineinteles, nu ma refeream la strategiile dumneavoastra ca fundatie, pentru viitor. L.P.: Adica la orice firma la care va duceti sa i intrebati asa ceva, va trantesc usa. Cred ca sunteti de acord cu mine. Traiti intr o lume libera, mai libera ca a noastra. Q: Nu voiam sa mi spuneti secrete, ci doar ce traininguri s au facut. L.P.: Nu secrete, dar e vorba despre o metodologie despre care nu sunt calificata sa vorbesc. Q: Ce relatie ati avut, daca a existat vreouna, cu membrii parteneriat ului inainte de infiintarea lui? V ati cunoscut inainte? L.P.: Da, o parte ne stiam. Q: Cu cine mai exact? L.P.: Cu Philip Morris. Q: Din cate am inteles eu, prin agentia de comunicare s a stabilit relatia cu dumneavoastra in cadrul parteneriatului. Sau a m inetels eu rau?

PAGE 140

140 L.P.: Image, firma care s a ocupat cu asta, au avut si ei o contributie, dar relatiile interpersonale nu le a fixat Image ul. Q: Am inteles. Credeti ca faptul ca va stiati cu ei de dinainte a avut vreun rol in stabilirea parteneriatului? A facilitat construirea parteneriatului, s au s ar fi intamplat cu oricine, in orice conditii? L.P.: Ce sa spun, probabil ca s ar fi intamplat cu oricine, daca s ar fi ajuns la concluziile la care s au ajuns cu noi. Nu cred ca a avut influenta foarte mare faptul ca ne cunosteam dinainte. Q: Deci a fost strict legat de program si de profesionalismul propunerii? L.P.: Sigur ca da, a fost legat de profesionalismul organizatiei. Puteam sa fim noi prieteni foarte buni, dar daca nu aveam si niste abilitati, nu c red ca am fi putut sa stabilim acest parteneriat. Q: Cum ati descrie dumneavostra nivelul de implicare al partenerilor in program, din perspectiva dumneavoastra? Cum a evoluat el? Ma refer la ce a facut fiecare. L.P.: Nivelul de implicare? Adica ce anume? Q: Ma refer de exemplu la alocare de timp, de resurse, ce rol au avut interesele individuale, cat de des au comunicat... cu dumneavoastra, de exemplu. L.P.: Comunicarea a fost buna, pe tot parcursul anilor, nu am avut niciun fel de neintelegeri sau lipsa de comunicare. Q: Si toti partenerii, din perspectiva dumneavoastra, s au implicat in mod egal ca timp? L.P.: Da, s au implicat exact in limita contractului de parteneriat. Deci foarte foarte atent, urmand destul de aproape de ceea ce trebuiau ei sa faca. Bine, cu mai mult suflet, sau cu mai putin, dar asta nu conteaza, sufletul conteaza mai putin in cazul de fata. Deci s au implicat asa cum prevedea parteneriatul. Q: Am inteles. Contractul de parteneriat stipuleaza ce trebuie sa faca fiecare. L.P.: Obligat iile partenerilor. Q: Va voi ruga sa identificati persoane sau organizatii care au indeplinit rolul de lider, coordonator si purtator de cuvand in cadrul acestui parteneriat. Din perspectiva dumneavoastra. Pot sa fie acceasi persoana, sau..

PAGE 141

141 L.P.: Toate a ceste atributii au fost stabilite prin contractul de parteneriat, pentru fiecare. Contractul a fost asa de bine facut, astfel incat vreau sa spun ca acelasi format il folosim de ani de zile. Q: Puteti sa mi spuneti din perspectiva dumneavoastra cine a fost liderul, cine coordonatorul si cine purtatorul de cuvant? L.P.: La un parteneriat, de la inceput partenerii sunt considerati ca egali. Deci nu exista lider. Q: Dar la nivel informal? Intotdeauna exista un lider la nivel informal. L.P.: La nivel informal.. pai dumeavoastra cum ati considera pe unul care va finanteaza? L ati considera lider? Q: Cred ca este vorba de o parere personala pana la urma. L.P.: Deci aici nu e vorba de pareri personale. Q: Ma intereseaza doar opinia dumneavoastra. L.P.: Deci este vo rba de primul mare parteneriat public privat care s a facut in Romania, inainte de a aparea legea. Q: Stiu, de aceea ma intereseaza sa stiu mai multe despre el. L.P.: E important, asta trebuie sa ma intrebati, nu ce parere am eu, ca nu sunt la psiholog. Q: Nu e vorba de asta. L.P.: Deci intr un parteneriat nu exista cineva sa fie lider de ceva. Partenerii sunt parteneri, parti egale, si au aceleasi drepturi si obligatii. Adica ce dau aia primesc. Daca anumite activitati sunt coordonate de o firma sau de nu stiu ce, profesionistii profesionistilor, aia da, atunci, ma rog, sa zicem ca de comunicare s a ocupat Image Promotion, pentru ca erau specializati in asa ceva. Dar de comunicarea catre terti, nu de comunicarea intre noi trei. Q: Am inteles. Si comunicarea dintre membrii, cine a coordonat o? Cum a fost ea gestionata? A existat un liant? L.P.: Nu stiu daca a coordonat o cineva; eu n am coordonat o, de exemplu. Poate ca finantatorii sau poate Ministerul Educatiei. Eu nu am simtit ca a coordonat cineva comunic area. Noi am avut o treaba de facut impreuna si am facut o. Q: Deci nu a existat un intermediar care sa pastreze legatura de a lungul timpului?

PAGE 142

142 L.P.: Nu, s a discutat de la persoana la persoana. Q: Am inteles. Am inteles ca nu exista lider pentru ca vorb im de un parteneriat. L.P.: Exact, si personal si profesional daca ma intrebati, tot acelasi raspuns e. Q: Coordonatorul programului ati fost dumneavoastra fundatia prin contract? L.P.: Da, da. Q: Si cand ne referim la coordonatorul programului, ne ref erim la coordonatorul programului in scoli, cu beneficiarii, asa este? L.P.: Da. Q: Dar purtatorul de cuvant? Cine a reprezentat parteneriatul catre publicul larg? L.P.: Pai parteneriatul l au reprezentat trei persoane atunci cand am avut ceva de comunicat cand am avut conferinte de presa. Au vorbit Ministrul Educatiei, ministrul in functie, indiferent de cine a fost in functie la momentul respectiv; a vorbit reprezentantul fundatiei, care a fost fie doamna Petrescu, fie eu, dupa cum am putut sa ne corelam ; si cineva din partea celor care au facut trainigul, din partea autorilor de manual, de regula doamna Liiceanu. Q: Imi puteti spune, va rog, cum au fost stabilite obiectivele parteneriatului initial? Daca au fost negociate intre parteneri, cum au reflecta t ele obiectivele dumneavoastra, ca fundatie, si obiectivele celorlalti participanti? L.P.: Da, deci au fost negociate de la inceput. Au urmarit obiectivele fundatiei. Deci daca aceste lucruri erau corelate cu obiectivele generale ale fundatiei, atunci a fost OK. Q: Si care au fost obiectivele fundatiei? L.P.: Intrati pe pluralism.ro, si o sa vedeti. Q: Obiectivele in general ale fundatiei, stiu, sunt pe site, dar in legatura cu programul acesta. L.P.: Au corespuns. Obiectivele fundatiei, obiectivele finan tatorilor, au corespuns, s au intalnit pe un teren convenabil pentru toata lumea. Q: Puteti sa mi dati niste exemple sau niste detalii? Altfel, vorbim foarte general.

PAGE 143

143 L.P.: Noi printre obiectivele specifice avem si acesta de constientizare, de instruire, d e educatie. Deci a intrat in acest calup: educatie pentru sanatate, educatie pentru alte lucruri; a intrat in calupul pentru educatie. Q: Cum credeti ca acest parteneriat a respectat obiectivele celorlalti parteneri? L.P.: Intrebati i pe ei. Eu cred asa: d aca parteneriatul functioneaza si astazi, insemna ca acest parteneriat a fost satisfacator si pentru obiectivele lor. Q: Daca ne referim la comunicarea dintre membrii de a lungul timpului, a fost ea mai mult directa intalniri sau mai degraba mediata? L.P.: Directa, directa. De cele mai multe ori au fost intalniri. Daca am avut nelamuriri punctuale, putem sa spunem si intermediata. Q: Si aceasta procedura a fost constanta de a lungul timpului sau s a schimbat pe parcurs? L.P.: Nu, nu, nu s a schimbat. Q : Si cam de cate ori v ati intalnit in medie pe luna sau pe an? A existat o regularitate? L.P.: Nu pot sa va fac o medie pentru ca de exemplu daca am avut o actiune de promovare sau de altceva, sigur ca am vorbit mai des. Sau daca am avut traininguri pentr u profesori, sigur ca am vorbit mai des. Am avut evaluari cu coordonatoriide teritorii, sigur ca ne am intalnit mai des. Sau am avut de facut un manual... Deci nu pot sa dau o medie. Poate sa treaca o perioade mai incarcate. Q: Exista anumite intalniri anuale sau regulate? L.P.: Nu sunt intalniri regulate, exista o intalnire anuala undeva in primavara in care se stabileste strategia pentru anul respectiv, se analizeaza rezultatele anulu i precedent. O adunare generala, dar nu la asemenea nivel, pur si simplu informare in cadrul partenerilor. Q: Intalnirea este cu toti partenerii ministerul, fundatia, finantatorii, agentia de comunicare, psihologii? L.P.: Da, da, da. Q: Va rog sa mi dati cateva exemple, daca va amintiti de a lungul timpului, de bariere de comunicare intre parteneri, daca au existat bineinteles. Cum au fost ele depasite?

PAGE 144

144 L.P.: Nu, nu mi aduc aminte, poate niste disfunctinalitati la un moment dat in comunicare, dar legate practic de persoane, nu de institutii. Q: Ce fel de disfunctionalitati? Legate de implicarea lor? L.P.: Legate de comunicarea lor, comunicare prin omisiune, lucruri de genul asta; nu au deranjat mersul programului, oricum. Q: Si cum au fost ele rezolvate? L.P.: Amiabil. Q: Puteti sa mi dati un exemplu concret? L.P.: Nu, nu mi amintesc. Q: Ce puteti sa mi spuneti de rezultatele programului? Mi ati mentionat la un moment dat despre evaluari cu coordonatorii de teritorii. Care au fost rezultatele si cum au fos t ele obtinute in legatura cu impactul asupra copiilor, profesorilor. Ce beneficii au avut ei? L.P.: Acesta este feedback ul. Normal ca avem tot felul de chestionare, de evaluari. Q: Chestionare pentru copii? L.P.: Da, si copii, si profesori, si consil ieri scolari. Avem chestionare pentru fiecare categorie si exista un evaluator independent care le centralizeaza, le pune in pagina, si de acolo mai tragem si noi niste concluzii, sigur ca da. Sau avem concursuri si fel de fel de lucruri prin care putem ex trage ce anume ne intereseaza mai mult. Q: Concursuri la care participa copiii? L.P.: Da. Q: Cam cat de des se intampla evaluarile? L.P.: Cel putin o data pe an. Q: Asta e valabil si pentru concursuri? L.P.: Da. Q: OK. Aceste rezultate sunt publice? L.P.: Nu.

PAGE 145

145 Q: Imi puteti da nu neaparat o cifra, dar un mic sumar al rezultatelor evaluarii din punct de vedere al impactului? Au existat evolutii? L.P.: Sigur ca eu existat. Q: Imi puteti spune, in cei 12 ani, in ce masura au evoluat? Sau daca va trimit o intre bare pe e mail, ma puteti ajuta un un raspuns dintr un raport, de exemplu? L.P.: In masura in care pot sa va ajut, va ajut. Oricum cifre nu va dau. Am vazut progresul si atat. Q: Si progresul cum a fost el masurat? L.P.: Pai ar trebui intrebat un evaluator Noua ni s a prezentat rezultatul si asta e. Q: Si rezultatul nu mi l puteti spune? L.P.: Nu, pentru ca e evaluare interna, am facut o pentru noi, sa stim daca mai lucram sau nu. Q: Asta inseamna ca a fost de bine, nu? L.P.: A fost. Q: OK, inteleg daca n u vreti sa mi dati numarul. L.P.: Nu, pentru ca nu vad la ce va ajuta. Q: Ma ajuta din perspectiva succesului parteneriatului. L.P.: Evident ca este un succes, din moment ce se produce de 13 ani. Q: Exista multe programe care se implementeaza de mult timp fara rezultate. Eu am fost implicata in acest parteneriat, foarte pe scurt, acum cativa ani, si ii stiu calitatea; dar as vrea sa stiu concret, daca se poate. L.P.: Mai concret nu se poate. Q: OK. Din punctul de vedere al fundatiei, care a fost principal ul beneficiu, ca urmare a participarii in acest parteneriat? L.P.: Am atins unul dintre obiectivele noastre majore, acela de educatie pentru tineri. Acesta a fost beneficiul major al fundatiei. Dupa aceea, sigur ca da, beneficii de imagine: este un progra m cu impact de imagine, si normal ca ne a crescut imaginea in acest rastimp, corect.

PAGE 146

146 Q: Daca ar fi sa faceti o lista cu factorii care au contribuit la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi? L.P.: Calitatea umana a membrilor echipei de proiect, inain te de orice. Calitatea umana. Onestitatea, dorinta de a face bine altora, conteaza foarte mult. Dedicatia lor pentru acest program. Q: Dedicatia tuturor partenerilor oficiali? L.P.: Da, absolut. Q: Deci asta a fost factorul definitoriu in interactiunea di ntre parteneri? L.P.: Da, da. Q: Si calitatea umana s a pastrat si cand s au schimbat oamenii? L.P.: Da, da, m a surprins chiar. De obicei calitatea umana e un factor fluctuant, nu poti sa stabilesti cu cine o sa ai de a face de la unul dintre parteneri, nu? Dar intamplarea a facut ca au fost niste oameni de calitate. Q: Deci nu va pot convinge sa mi comunicati niste rezultate ale programului? Nu este un program public? L.P.: Nu, nu este un program public. Exista un site al programului. Q: Am inteles, eu a m crezut ca sunt un pic mai transparente, din moment ce este un program educational pentru copii. Macar in mare. L.P.: Exista un site al programului Q: Stiu site ul, nu contine neaparat rezultate, e un site foarte dragut, cu sectiuni pentru fiecare, m am uitat pe el. Pe mine ma interesau rezultatele la nivel social. L.P.: Haideti sa le formulati mai clar exact ce vreti, scrieti un e mail, si daca pot sa va raspund, va raspund, daca nu, va raspund ca nu pot. Q: Bine, doamna Popa, acestea au fost intrebarile mele. Daca exista ceva care nu v am intrebat si credeti ca ar fi relevant in contextul interviului, va rog sa mi spuneti. L.P.: Nu stiu in momentul acesta ce as putea sa spun. Eu: OK. Va multumesc mult de tot ca ati acceptat sa vorbiti cu mine. Va voi scr ie un e mail cu intrebarile suplimentare. O seara placuta sa aveti. L.P.: Sigur ca da, si dumneavoastra. La revedere.

PAGE 147

147 In depth interview, February 3, 2011 din partea m inisterului si de cat timp ati fost implicata? Q: Ne referim la intreg programul. D.C.: Da, deci implicarea mea este din anul 2000, deci foarte aproape de consiliere la clasele sase si sapte din gimnaziu. La vremea respectiva s a bucurat de un mare succes; pe rsonal am participat la cateva activitati si am vazut entuziasmul copiilor si al cadrelor didactice, de fapt al consilierilor psiho pedagogici implicati, fapt care ne a determinat sa continuam programul intr o structura... o adresabilitate un pic mai larga pentru clasele cinci opt. Avand si experienta din acesti ani pana in 2007, ne am gandit ca ar fi bine sa spargem bariera de comunicare intre generatii parinti, profesori, elevi mai ales pe anumite teme care sunt specifice varstei de pubertate si pre a dolescenta. Q: Deci dumneavoastra din partea ministerului ati intrat din anul 2000 si ati fost singura reprezentanta a ministerului care a tinut legatura cu parteneriatul? D.C.: Eu am preluat in anul 2000; deja programul, dupa ce fusese pilotat, se desfas ura in mai multe unitati de invatamant din tara, dupa care, la propunerea partenerilor si cu experienta psihologilor, am considerat ca este bine sa l extindem si sa l largim la nivelul tarii si la nivelul unitatilor de invatamant din toata tara, dar si la mai multe clase. Q: Am inteles. Componenta parteneriatului a ramas constanta, din cate am vazut eu. D.C.: Da, deci a fost o componenta esentiala. Q: Intre timp, reprezentantii din partea organizatiilor implicate s au mai schimbat. Cum credeti ca au afecta t aceste schimbari in masura in care suntenti la curent cu ele cum au afectat dinamica parteneriatului? Ma refer la oamenii care au fost implicati din partea institutiilor partenere. D.C.: Comunicarea nu a fost afectata. Nu cunosc foarte mult la nivel ul organizatiei, cum a afectat, dar spun cum s a reflectat in colaborarea noastra. Deci noi nu am simtit aceste schimbari datorita faptului ca au

PAGE 148

148 ramas stabili colaboratorii care au si realizat materialul informativ pentru profesori. Q: Am inteles. D.C.: D eci din punctul nostru de vedere, lucrurile au mers bine, chiar mult mai usor decat ma asteptam sau in alte colaborari pe care le am avut. Q: Oamenii care au creatmaterialul va referiti la psihologi? Doamna Liiceanu? Domnul Popescu? D.C.: Exact. Nu au ra mas toti, e adevarat, dar o parte au ramas si au asigurat continuitatea. Q: Va rog sa mi spuneti ce rol au jucat / joaca in continuare beneficiarii acestui program parintii, copiii, profesorii in crearea si implementarea acestui program? Au fost ei co nsultati? S a facut o cercetare? D.C.: Cu cercetarea nu sunt la curent; stiu ca s a facut un raport prezentat de catre psihologul Andrei Popescu la vremea respectiva. Eu stiu din feedback urile pe care le aveam de la oamenii mei din teritoriu, e vorba des pre inspectorii educativi, care erau principalii responsabili la nivel de teritoriu de a derula acest proiect. Si feedback ul a fost bun. Se simte nevoia de informatie, de acest gen de informatie care este alt tip fata de cel pe care l ofera scoala in cadr ul disciplinelor. Q: Ok. Si ei v au pus la curent cu feedback ul profesorilor si au fost reprezentantii profesorilor, ca parare despre program? D.C.: Da, cunosc cativa profesori care m au intrebat cu ceva timp in urma de ce nu se continua programul si nu se extinde. Q: Si asta v a ajutat sa extindeti programul, fiind vorba de un feedback pozitiv. D.C.: Exact, este o noua viziune si o noua abordare. Avand experienta sistemului de stat, a invatamantului de stat, am identificat acele oportunitati unde se pret eaza a se discuta si a se realiza un astfel de program. Pentru ca este foarte usor sa faci lucruri foarte utile si foarte bune, dar trebuie sa le asiguri si o implemenatre foarte buna. Q: De la cine a venit propunerea acestui program catre minister? De la companiile de tutun sau de la Fundatia pentru Pluralism ? D.C.: De la fundatie. Q: Deci prin fundatie s a mentinut relatia cu dumneavoastra?

PAGE 149

149 D.C.: Da, avem un parteneriat inchiat de mult, de cand s a lansat programul. Q: Da, am inteles. Intrebarea mea ear daca fundatia in principal a mentinut relatia cu dumneavoastra, sau companiile de tutun. Care a fost reprezentantul cu care ati vorbit dumneavoastra cel mai des? D.C.: E, din cate stiu, cu presedintele fundatiei, pe care de altfel o si cunosc, doamna Liana Popa. Cu dumneaei am colaborat, nu stiu de la companii daca au venit la Minister, dar nu cred, nu cred ca au fost. Q: OK. Si cu doamna Liana Popa cu fundatia aveati o relatie deja stabilita inainte de acest parteneriat? A facilitat cumva aceasta relat ie parteneriatul in sine? Eu stiu.. prin increderea in ei sau alte aspecte. D.C.: Eu am preluat un program pe care l am continuat si aveam niste feedback uri din teritoriu, deci a fost dovada ca lucrurile sunt bune si ca trebuie continuate. Pe mine aspectu l acesta m a interesat in mod deosebit si ma intereseaza in continuare indiferent de tipul de parteneriat. Q: OK, deci practic ideea lucrului bine facut si profesionist.. D.C.: Si in folosul elevilor si tinerilor. Q Deci dincolo de increderea pe care o ave ti intr o fundatie sau alta. Este mai important produsul in sine decat faptul ca ii cunoasteti si stiti ca sunt profesionisti? D.C.: Deci evident ca intai a fost produsul si apoi a intervenit cunoasterea si increderea de fapt. Q: Am intels, ca asta era int rebarea mea; daca mai colaboraserati inainte. D.C.: Nu, nu. Q: Acum e clar. Cum ati descrie dumneavoastra nivelul de implicare a partenerilor? Ma refer aici la alocare de timp, de resurse, interese de organizatie. D.C.: Deci eu nu am simtit interese de or ganizatie, dar banuiesc ca orice organizatie non guvernamentala care desfasoara un program educational intr un parteneriat cu o institutie de stat are tot interesul ca produsul sa fie de calitate pentru este si o chestie de imagine, si de plasare pe scara si ierarhia organizatiilor non guvernamentale care fac anumite lucruri si de succes. Deci interesul intr un parteneriat este de ambele parti. Q: Bineinteles. Ma refer la nivelul de implicare. De exemplu s a simtit la un moment dat nevoia ca unul dintre par teneri sa se implice mai mult, altul s a implicat mai putin, au fost dezechilibre in nivelul de implicare?

PAGE 150

150 D.C.: De cand colaborez eu, nu, nu au fost, dar intotdeauna este loc de mai bine; deci daca stau sa ma gandesc la produsul din 2007, cel putin acum i n 2011 mai trebuie adus la zi pentru ca si situatia se schimba, si nevoile scolilor sunt altele, si ale elevilor in special, problemele cu care ei se confrunta sunt altele; deci orice lucru in educatie trebuie reactualizat din 5 in 5 ani cel putin. Q: Si ultima data cand a fost actualizat a fost in 2007, nu? D.C.: In 2007, exact. Q: OK. Va rog sa identificati liderul, coordonatorul si purtatorul de cuvant ai acestui parteneriat. Ma intereseaza opinia dumneavoastra, din experienta interactiunii cu partener ii. D.C.: Presedintele fundatiei e liderul. Si directorul de program bineinteles. Q: Si coordonatorul? D.C.: Va referiti din partea fundatiei? Q: In general, al produsului in sine. D.C.: Deci toti trei pe care i am spus presedintele, directorul de progr am si coordonatorul. Q: Deci fundatia are rol de lider si de coordonator. Dar purtatorul de cuvant? D.C.: Nu neaparat de lider, fiind vorba de un parteneriat, exista un echilibru intre parti, dar este cel a carui initiativa a fost; deci intotdeauna exista un lucru nescris dar care trebuie respectat si facut intr un consens. Q: Da, ma refeream liderul la nivel informal. D.C.: Da, intr adevar, ce pot sa va spun este ca initiativa apartine fundatiei, fiindca noi ca si sistem de stat, fiind un sistem foarte m are, trebuie sa ni se aduca aminte. Si chiar mie, de multe ori; este firesc, pentru ca nu ma ocup numai de acest lucru, si atunci un telefon, un e mail este bine venit si un termen in care sa ma incadrez ca sa iasa lucrurile asa cum trebuie. Q: Iar e mailu l si telefonul vin de obicei de la fundatie? D.C.: Exact. Q: Ati spus ca initiativa a fost a fundatiei. Din cate am citit eu, ar fi fost al companiilor de tutun. Sau am inteles eu rau?

PAGE 151

151 D.C.: Eu istoria nu o cunosc. Ce port eu legatura, este doar cu fundati a. Q: Cum a fost definita aceasta problema a curriculumului initial? Cum au fost stabilite obiectivele programului? D.C.: Asa cum a debutat, eu m am uitat pe materialele produse initial, el a fost gandit ca sa intre pe activitatea de consiliere si orienta re pe planul de invatamant care a fost revizuit pe vremea Domnului Ministru Marga. Ulterior, planul de invatamant a mai suportat modificari si atunci am incercat sa ne pliem pe ceea ce ofera sistemul de invatamant astfel incat sa pastram elementele care ad uceau plus valoare pentru sistemul de educatie, in special pentru elevi. Q: OK, deci s au modificat intre timp, in acord cu ce s a intamplat la nivel de minister si in legi. D.C.: Exact, exact. Q: Dar propunerea initiala tot de la fundatie a venit? D.C.: P ropunerea initiala presupun ca de la fundatie a venit, sau cel putin de cand am preluat eu, avand in vedere ca eu tin legatura cu fundatia. Q: Am inteles. Intrebarea mea urmatoare ar fi fost cum a urmarit acest program obiectivele ministerului, dar am stab ilit asta, s a incadrat in activitatea de consiliere care se adoptase la nivel national la vremea aceea. D.C.: Da, noi ulterior am extins la ora de dirigentie, ceea ce ni s a parut un lucru foarte bun si care da niste rezultate. A fost creat si ca material cu fise de lucru si pentru parinti la intalnirile si sedintele cu parintii fiindca foarte care parintii ori nu le cunosteau daca ma refer la mediul rural sau mediul urban dezava ntajat ori le considerau tabu si nu le discutau cu copiii. Dar in acelasi timp, este adevarat ca si pentru unii profesori este destul de greu sa discute anumite teme. De aceea, ne am propus sa fie si foarte multa activitate extracurriculara, adica sa fie metodele interactive, sa fie placute si atractive orele; pentru ca se discuta de niste lucruri foarte serioase care sunt importante pentru informatia unui viitor tanar. Iar aceste carente am constatat ca existau si in familii si atuncea ne am gandit sa fa cem aceste materiale accesibile si pentru parinti. Q: Cand spuneti activitati extracurriculare, la ce va referiti mai exact? Imi puteti da un exemplu? D.C.: Deci activitatea extracurriculara este activitatea care se face in cadru organizat in scoala, dar in afara orelor de curs. Si poate sa fie un concurs pe o anumita tema din program; poate sa fie un concurs prin eseuri, desene, mici filmulete sau spoturi; ideea e ca elevii sa fie creativi, implicati,

PAGE 152

152 si sa rezolve o problema. Si mai pot fi si activitati extrascolare cum s a cand o parte din proiect s a continuat prin activitatile de tabara, deci in afara unitatilor de invatamant, dar tot in cadru organizat, cu consilierii psiho pedagogici. Q: Am inteles. Pana in ziua de astazi se desfasoara aceste tipuri de activitati? Si extracurriculare si extrascolare? D.C.: Sistemul de invatamant prevede obligativitatea acestor activitati, sigur ca da, la fiecare unitate de invatamant. Si atunci a fost foarte bine, fiindca noi avand un material produs si recunoscut, a fost mai simplu pentru cadrul didactic decat sa si colecteze el singur informatia; avand materialul, nu a trebuit decat sa l prelucreze si sa l puna in practica. Deci am scutit oarecum timpul pentru documentare, i nformare; plus ca nu intotdeauna stim daca sursa este avizata si corecta. Q: Astfel toti copiii au putut avea, mai mult sau mai putin, aceeasi experienta si aceeasi calitate a materialelor. D.C.: Da, deci am incercat sa asiguram oarecum o uniformitate a in formatiei la nivel de tara. Q: Programul la momentul asta este implementat in absolut toate scolile, scolile care aplica pentru program, cum se intampla implementarea? D.C.: Nu, acum eu vorbesc la nivel de judet, pentru ca imi e mai simplu, pentru ca eu vi n in contact direct si am ca obiect de activitate si Educatia pentru Sanatate, si atunci se leaga foarte bine cu ceea ce se discuta si prin educatie pentru sanatate, pentru orele d e dirigentie, pentru activitatile extracuriculare de care v am vorbit. Dar pot sa va spun ca chiar daca nu se face in integraliate, ora de ora, saptamana de saptamana, din program, materialul este folosit cel putin un semestru, daca e sa ma refer ca timp. Deci este un lucru foarte bun ca informatie si ceea ce ne propunem noi sa atingem in final. Q: Vreau doar sa verific ca am inteles bine cum se implementeaza. Deci nu este day by day si in fiecare saptamana; programul poate fi impartit... D.C.: Tocmai de ac eea ca sa nu impunem am lasat... ca sa ne asiguram ca acoperim o zona cat mai mare din tara, am identificat in planul de invatamant si in activitatile pe care cadrele didactice sunt obligate sa le desfasoare mai multe puncte unde se pot folosi informatii din program. Deci fie ca programul se face ora de ora sub forma unui optional care se trece in catalog, care beneficiaza de toate conditiile legale a unui optional, conform planului de invatamant, fie ca se abordeaza in orele de dirigentie, fie ca se fac activitati extracurriculare care sunt parte a programului la scoala respectiva. Deci am lasat si posibilitatea sa vorbim de o descentralizare a

PAGE 153

153 sistemului de invatamant am lasat si posibilitatea scolii si a comunitatilor locale care fac parte din consi liile de administratie ale scolilor, sa identifice nevoile si sa poata sa abordeze temele care sunt de interes pentru comunitatea respectiva, folosind informatiile din program. Q: Am inteles, acum e clar. Cum ati comunicat de a lungul timpului in cadrul pa rteneriatului? Mai mult direct prin intalniri sau mai mult mediat prin e mail, telefon? D.C.: Prin intalniri, materiale si prelucrarea informatiei. Si au fost prezentate din tara si exemple de buna practica, deci eu va spun ca mie imi place programu l si imi place si mai mult reactia pe care o primesc din teritoriu. Dar nu pot a spun ca este suficient, intotdeauna exista loc de mai mult, de mai bine, si de mai multa calitate. Oricum este un castig pentru sistem abordarea care a fost propusa prin cele doua programe Q: A fost un beneficiu pentru minister, ati spus? D.C.: Un beneficiu pentru sistemul de invatamant si mai aples in 1999, 1998, cand s a lansat, era un program inovator prin tot ceea ce propunea. Era o alta abo rdare cu care sistemul la vremea respectiva nu era obisnuit. Q: Si cand spuneti asta va referiti si la tematica si la modul de implementare.. D.C.: Exact, la tot, la calitatea materialelor, la calitatea oamenilor care au fost formati si care desfasurau act ivitatile in scoli. Eu: Oamenii formati de fundatie, nu? D.C.: Exact. Q: Au existat de a lungul timpului bariere de comunicare intre dumneavoastra si fundatie, sa zic, din moment ce cu ei ati comunicat mai des? D.C.: De comunicare, nu in sensul in care nu am dorit sa comunicam ci in sensul ca au fost foarte multe schimbari si am asteptat sa vedem unde gasim varianta cea mai buna de a implementa si de a continua programul; pentru ca la un moment dat din 1999 pana in 2007 au fost niste ani, mai ales in ultim ii ani catre 2007 cand se pierduse din spiritul proiectului. Q: Si cum s a regasit acest spirit? D.C.: Pai s a regasit prin faptul ca s a reluat activitatea, s a facut aceasta extindere si pentru parinti si am avut posibilitatea prin structura pe care am avut o in teritoriu, sa ne intalnim cu ei, sa vorbim, si sa avem feedback ul

PAGE 154

15 4 din teritoriu, sa primeasca materiale pentru ca si asta este un lucru foarte important, pentru ca degeaba vorbesti si nu dai nimic omului. Q: Deci s a rezolvat prin mai multe in talniri, intalniri in teritoriu, implicarea parintilor. D.C.: Exact, si in primul rand s au rezolvat prin intalnirile cu oameni care erau implicati factori de indrumare, control si decizie din inspectoratele scolare, deci care au si o autoritate, si aces ta este un lucru foarte bun. Q: Deci pana la urma tot intalnirile fata in fata au rezolvat... D.C.: Acuma cum sa va spun, eu sunt profesor, daca nu vad si ochii celor care ma asculta ca sa stiu cum sa mi adaptez discursul, e mai complicat. Pot sa fiu genia la in ceea ce transmit, dar daca nu simt publicul ca reactioneaza la ceea ce spun, pe mine nu ma satisface. Q: Corect. D.C.: Oricum este un sistem care lucreaza cu oameni, si proiectul se refera la oameni, deci ar fi absurd sa facem un proiect pentru elev i si problemele lor si sa le trimitem e mail, daca au mail, ca acum au majoritatea. Q: Ati simtit la un moment dat vreo bariera din perspectiva distributiei puterii in parteneriat? De exemplu finantatorii sa fi avut ceva de spus sau impus... D.C.: Nu, asta m a si surprins, ca indiferent de schimbarile care au fost, proiectul a fost agreat. Fiindca, vedeti dumneavoastra, cel putin de cand lucrez eu in minister, cand vii cu o idee generoasa, cand vii cu un lucru care iti rezolva si tie ca sistem anumite probl eme in educatie, ar fi absurd sa spui ca nu vrei asa ceva, cand ai o mana intinsa. Q: Sa trecem un picut la rezultatele pe care le ati inregistrat cu acest parteneriat, si cand ma refer la rezultate, ma refer la rezultate privind beneficiarii: exista rapoa rte, niste cifre disponibile? Cum a evoluat programul din punct de vedere a rezultatelor? D.C.: Deci eu am rezultatele mele, pentru ca pe mine ma intereseaza in complexul tipurilor de educatie; si atunci exista un calendar, un grafic de activitati in fiec are an pe care il face inspectoratul scolar cu inspectorul invatamant s fost organizate a nivel local pe teme din p ceva de genul acesta exista. Deci noi centralizam ca numar de unitati de invatamant. Daca ma intrebati care este acest numar pot sa va spun ca am doua cifre care o sa va uimeasca, si va explic si de ce. Pana acum patru ani, toate unitatile de invatamant aveau personalitate juridica, daca aveau de la 100 de copii inscrisi in sus. Ulterior, scolile au fost comasate; a ramas o scoala de centru, iar scolile cu populatie scolara mai mica au fost puse in

PAGE 155

155 subordine, si atunci noi nu ne raportam decat la scoala cu personalitate juridica. Deci cifra este pe jumatate. Q: Care este cifra, daca puteti sa mi spuneti? D.C.: In jur de 3400 care au facut activitati cu acest program, ca de beneficiat ar trebui sa beneficieze absolut toate scol ile, pentru ca au avut materiale informative. Dar in functie de... pentru ca v am spus ca el se poate face ca optional, si la orele de dirigentie, atunci as putea sa spun ca se face in 6400 de scoli cu personalitate juridica; asta avand in vedere ca la ore le de dirigentie se fac teme din program, atunci am bunul simt si spun doar pe cele unde se implementeaza mai mult din program. Q: Deci 6400 care implementeaza programul in orele de dirigentie si in activitatile extracurriculare. D.C.: Daca ar fi dupa lege ei ar trebui sa foloseasca informatia din proiect si in cadrul orelor de dirigentie. Dar va spun ca cei care fac mai mult, si am vazut din activitati, sunt undeva la jumatate. Oricum este foarte mult in comparatie cu cum a debutat proiectul, cum a fost p ilotat. Q: Deci 3400 de scoli cu personalitate juridica au facut activitati in cadrul D.C.: Exact. Q: Bun. Rezultate din punct de vedere al impactului la nivel de elevi cum i a ajutat programul pe ei exista in mi nister? D.C.: Nu, noi nu ne ocupam cu astfel de cercetari, nu e competenta noastra. Dar teoretic, ca si scoala care abordeaza aceste teme, cel putin ii spui ca exista o astfel de problema, sau ca se pot confrunta cu..., sau ca pot sa si rezolve si alte pro am invatat la o cercetare, se esantioneaza, deci noi nu am facut o pentru ca pe mine ma intereseaza sa se stie de program si sa se faca, pentru ca am dat exact unde se poate face si ce trebuie sa se faca. Q: Ce beneficii percepeti dumneavoastra pentru ceilalti parteneri? D.C.: Fundatia isi continua o activitate cu un parteneriat si cu un impact in teritoriu, ceea ce mie mi se pare foarte important. Ar vrea multe fundatii sa aiba un astfel de i mpact. Q: Si modalitatea de obtinere a acestui impact este prin calitatea materialelor?

PAGE 156

156 D.C.: A materialelor si a oamenilor cu care au lansat programul. Deci daca proiectul nu pleca bine de la inceput, nu avea nicio sansa acum. Q: Faptul ca a fost finanta t in mod permanent? D.C.: Da, orice lucru trebuie sa fie finantat, pentru ca daca nu finantezi niste manuale, n ai cum sa transmiti informatia. Deci in prima faza, anii de pilotare au fost si de popularizare a programului si chiar cunosc niste cadre didact ice care au fost formate initial si care si acum fac ora de ora acest program. Sunt nostalgici si sunt mandri. Q: Nostalgici? Se implementeza in continuare, nu? D.C.: Sunt nostalgici ca nu fac toti, in sensul asta. Q: Daca ar fi sa faceti o lista cu cei ma i importanti factoricare au contribuit la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi? Si ca interactiune intre membri si ca rezultate. D.C.: Deci in primul rand, daca nu eram un sistem de stat care sa poata sa identifice si sa aiba autoritate asupra terito riului, n ar fi mers. Deci asta este opinia mea. Indiferent cat de bune ar fi fost materialele, daca nu ar fi fost o coerenta, o continuitate si o oarecare stare de spirit a oamenilor, nu, nu s ar fi putut. Pentru ca daca nu crezi intr o idee, nu poti sa o faci. Q: Cand va referiti la coerenta si continuitate, va referiti la toti partenerii implicati? D.C.: Eu ma refer la sistemul meu. La noi au fost foarte multe schimbari, dar am reusit sa tinem pasul, pentru ca teritoriul dadea semnale ca merge si ca dore ste, conditii in care ar fi fost o crima sa nu oferi astfel de informatii. Q: Deci flexibilitatea sistemului. D.C.: Da, este, pentru ca v am spus, la vremea respectiva, si si acuma desi mai sunt cateva este un program inovator; schimba oarecum optica s istemului de invatamant, a abordarii didactice; si probabil ca de aici incolo spre asta ne indreptam, inclusiv in cadrul disciplinelor consacrate. Trebuie schimbata un pic metoda de predare, sa trecem de la prelegere la mai multa interactivitate, la mai mu lta colaborare in care elevul sa se simta parte integranta, sa simta ca el exista acolo si ca pentru el se face. Q: Si daca ne referim la relatia dumneavoastra cu ceilalti parteneri, care au fost factorii care au sustinut aceasta relatie? D.C.: Ca au dorit sa faca. Q: Deci disponibilitatea.

PAGE 157

157 D.C.: Exact, pentru ca multe idei sunt bune, dar raman pe hartie si nu se concretizeaza. Q: Deci consecventa. D.C.: Da, sa doresti sa faci. Eu acum as face o precizare: eu chiar sunt unul din oamenii care sunt entuziasm ati de astfel de proiecte, si poate ca un 10% sunt subiectiva in ceea ce v am spus. Dar daca nu se fac astfel de programe, va dura mult pana se va schimba sistemul de invatamant. Ne propunem sa schimbam sistemul de invatamant si ne propunem sa abordam nist e teme de care ne am temut cu totii. Eu personal am foarte multe proiecte cu organizatii, au fost mai multe initial dar au ramas cei seriosi, cei care au facut treaba pana la capat. Q: Si diferenta dintre cei care nu au reusit si cei care au reusit a fost. D.C.: Consecventa si lucrul de calitate, si sa crezi intr o idee; pentru ca lucrurile se simt. Cand esti pus doar sa ti faci imagine si vrei sa faci o conferinta de presa ca mare program ai facut si de fapt nu ai facut nimic, se vede si se simte si oricu m moare. Colaborez nu numai cu Fundatia pentru Pluralism, ci cu mai multe fundatii serioase in tara pe mai multe domenii de educatie, si lucrurile bune se vad cu oamenii care sunt seriosi si cred in ceea ce fac. Din pacate pentru sistemul nostru; dar si in sistemul de stat si in cel an ONG urilor, lucrurile sunt oarecum asemenatoare: daca vrei sa faci, faci si crezi cu adevarat si ai niste rezultate, daca vrei sa te faci ca faci, nu o sa ai rezultate. Q: Da, asta se intampla peste tot, nu numai in sistemul nostru. D.C.: Da, presupun ca da. Dar intr adevar, educatia, ma refer la tipurile de activitati educative, ca sunt pentru dezvoltare durabila, ca sunt pentru mediu, ca sunt pentru cultura, merita si au succes. Eu le vad pe acestea in teritoriu. Deci ceea ce este facut cu pasiune si schimbata un pic abordarea are mult mai mult succes decat disciplina in sine. In depth interview, February 10, 2011 pentru Pluralism, si sa spun sincer nici nu mai stiu cand a inceput; in orice caz a avut o lungime destul de mare, am lucrat foar te mult cu copiii si cu profesorii si cu dirigintii. In felul acesta, cand am fost solicitata a doua oara, am lucrat manualele si materialele pentru copii si cand a fost vorba sa m redactat acel manual strict pentru profesori si pentru diriginti si in care am

PAGE 158

158 fost ajutata de o colega se a mea, Doina Saucan, amandoua fiind la la avut succes si inca multa lume tine cont si ca raspandim foarte mult chiar si Q: Deci dumneavostra ati fost implicata inca de la inceputul parteneriatului, de la primul material. A.L.: Vreau sa spun ca eu reprezint, impreuna cu colega mea, partea academica, asa cum se face un parteneriat intre institutiile guvernamentale, intre ONG uri si lumea academica. Q: Din cate stiu eu si am mai vorbit cu ceilalti membri din parteneriat, s au mai schimbat reprezentantii din partea organizatiilor implicate. C um credeti ca au afectat aceste schimbari dinamica parteneriatului, interactiunea, modul de colaborare intre dumneavoastra si ceilalti membri ai parteneriatului? trecut prin ma i multi, cred ca patru cinci, ministri, nici nu mai tin minte, insa toata lumea a recunoscut ca acest program este foarte important, a fost foarte bine primit in scoli si sustinut foarte mult de profesori, deci cred ca din acest punct de vedere nu a avut n iciun fel de dinamica tulburata de schimbarile la nivelul conducerii ministerului. Iar coordonarea a ramas in continuare cu Fundatia pentru Pluralism. Q: Deci la fundatie au ramas constante doamna Petescu si doamna Popa? A.L.: Da, da. Liana Popa si Lumini ta Petrescu. Q: Dar partenerii corporatisti? Dumneavoastra ati intrat in contact cu ei? V a afectat in vreun fel faptul ca au fost schimbari la ei? A.L.: Nu, in niciun fel, si in general sa stiti ca acest lucru este, dupa parerea mea, avantajul partii acad emice, pentru ca tu esti responsabil de continut, tu esti aproape de subiect, tu cunosti comunitatea stiintifica, cadrul psihologie si in stiintele educationale nu spun pedagogie p entru ca mi se pare mai corect stiinta educationala astfel incat am fost perfect lasati liberi sa procedam cum credem noi in ceea ce priveste continutul. Si, sigur, as putea sa spun fara modestie ca si fata de profesori si diriginti reprezentam dimensiun ea cea mai solida profesional din cadrul desfasurarii acestui program participat la toate trainingurile si pot sa spun ca cunosc si profesorii care reprezinta un judet; insa chiar daca si la ei s au mai schimbat oamenii, o buna parte din ei au ramas. Chiar acum m am intors de la o intalnire cu am cu

PAGE 159

159 Fundatia Tineri pentru Tineri, este vorba de un program national pe lucrez de 10 ani in Oct. anul acesta el se incheie. Deci, vedeti, partea constanta a fost formata din trei el emente: ministerul, noi, adica partea academica, si o parte din profesori si inspectori. Ce se schimba sunt copiii si ONG urile care au intrat in aceste parteneriate. Q: Ce rol au jucat beneficiarii elevii, profesorii, parintii in crearea acestui parte neriat si in implementarea lui? Puteti sa mi dati cateva exemple? In ce masura au fost ei implicati? In ce momente? A.L.: Pai bineinteles, exista si un site. Au fost implicati fiindca s a facut sondaje, chestionare, si am avut intalniri cu inspectorii ina inte de implementa programul ca sa vedem cum putem sa administram aceste evenimente, cu cat mai multe avantaje la toate nivelurile; pentru ca este vorba si de parinti, si de profesori si de diriginti, inspectori, cei de la minister. Intr un fel, tot progr amul are doua paliere foarte mari, in care nu poti sa spui ca beneficiarul este o singura parte; pe de o parte este adultul, in diferitele sale ipostaze, si pe de alta parte este cel care este educat, sau informat, sau format, iar accentul este pus pe meto da si pe relatii, pentru ca copiii sa fie cat mai receptivi la mesajele noastre. In acelasi timp, am considerat ca trebuie sa educam deasupra ideii de sanatate, de decizie, de si gestioneze viata intr un doua lucruri esentiale: importanta auto cunoasterii, pentru a stabili un raport intre felul in care isi construieste identitatea un copil sau elev, si viata in care traieste, epoca; si pe de alta parte aceasta gandire critica, pentru ca stim foarte bine ca mass media promoveaza sau emite mesaje care sunt incomplete, comerciale, contradictorii si cateodata, chiar inutile. Pot sa dau si exemple: de exemplu noi am lucrat la de ce sa si control eze copilul droguri, fumat, violenta si chiar computerul, dar am luat si shoppingul. Ori la televiziune un copil cand vede acea emisiune difuzata la o ora onorabila si ce crede cand eu ii spun cand shopping ul nu intra in randul pasiunilor ci in randul adictiilor? Am avut si un coleg psihiatru care a explicat foarte frumos ca shopping ul pana la urma daca mergem in ritmul asta sigur, intr un ton un pic umoristic o sa intre in DSM. Ca dupa aia sa iasa din DSM, pentru ca daca este suficient de raspandit, intra in categoria normalitatii. Si discutiile au fost extraordinar de interactive cu copiii. Chiar si acum, la Sinaia, a fost a timpului in care traim, cu binele si cu raul lui. Q: Am inteles, deci au fost discutii interactive cu copiii, cu profesorii si acestea au modificat materialul pe care l ati propus dumneavoastra de fiecare data?

PAGE 160

160 A.L.: Nu l a modifica t in acest sens... acesta [materialul] a fost scheletul; discutiile au fost mult mai largi decat decat pur si simplu tematica batuta in cuie care este prinsa in ghid. Q: Tematica asta batuta in cuie dumneavoastra ati facut o cercetare inainte cu copiii, ca sa ajungeti la nevoia lor de a fi educati pe partea asta? A.L.: Ei, sigur ca am avut discutii cu copiii, si pe de alta parte, propriu zis, eu si cu colega mea am pornit de la ceva lateral, de la faptul ca noi lucrand vreo cinci ani la criminologie, si luc rand foarte mult intr un proiect european pe adolescentii infractori, am pornit de la ideea violentei, mass media, droguri, trafic, prostitutie, si asa mai departe. In continuare, toate acestea se leaga de problema sanatatii mentala si fizica deci vede ti ca pana la urma subiectul este foarte foarte larg si poti sa faci diverse asocieri la nivel stiintific. Q: Deci dumneavoastra ati avut contact cu adolescentii infractori si dupa aceea, cand a venit ideea parteneriatului, dumneavoastra ati aplicat o cer cetare deja existenta pe copiii din scolile din Romania. A.L.: Da. Am urmarit si tot ce s a publicat in ziare la noi, toate statisticile, toate ONG urile care au lucrat cu copiii; am avut un corp de date locale pe care sa ne bazam. Sigur, partea proasta es te ca nu exista sigur costa si foarte multi bani un observator national pe anumite tema. Pentru ca stiti ca exista ANA cu drogurile, violenta in familie si alte statistici, insa pana la urma desi se fac statistici pe o anumita zona, noi nu avem un obse rvator national cum au francezii, de exemplu legat de violenta scolara. Poate ca o sa se faca si lucrul asta, care ar trebui facut pe tot ce exista in viata copiilor ca si comportament de risc, care ne intereseaza la nivel psihologic, social, si chiar economic. Q: Cum ati intrat dumneavoastra in acest parteneriat? Dela cine a venit propunerea? Cum ati ajuns sa faceti parte din echipa la inceput? catre Image Promotion care are un rol din acesta de produs materiale, site uri, adica este un organism care se ocupa cu publicitate, cu materiale, cu de toate, cu facutul de carti, cu computere, cu chestii de genul asta; si pentru ca cunosteam pe cineva atuncea, mi a spus, uite, e vorba despr e un program educational, etc. Cred ca au trecut de atunci mai mult de 10 ani. Q: OK, deci ati cunoscut pe cineva de la Image. A.L.: Oricum pe piata nu exista foarte multe lume care sa intre in programe educationale si in campanii sociale. Campaniile socia le imediat se vede daca ai vreo motivatie pentru acest tip de actiune, proiect sau program.

PAGE 161

161 Q: Credeti faptul ca ii cunosteati pe cei de la Image v a determinat sa participati? A.L.: Nu, in niciun fel. Am avut relatii profesionale dar si relatii mai apropi ate. Cineva mi a spus de acolo ca exista in Spania o fundatie a reginei Sofia pe violenta, si cum eram foarte motivata pe problema violentei, am adus de acolo o profesoara si care se cunostea stiti cum este cu reletele de oameni care se cunosc, nu? si mi a facut un serviciu foarte mare ca am primit toate materialele cu tot ce se intampla la nivel de violenta in Spania. Ma rog, ca programe. Q: Si aceste materiale v au inspirat pentru proiectul din Romania? A.L.: Nu numai asta, dar cum v am spus, am fost la Institutul de Criminologie, unde sigura asta era o tema extraordinata violenta la toate nivelurile si de acolo am participat cu doi colegi de ai mei si cu Doina Saucan program euro pean care a cuprins Italia, Franta, Spania, Germania, si Romania, pe subiectul violentei in randul adolescentilor. Q: Am inteles. Si asta a fost inainte... A.L.: Am lucrat doi ani de zile, sau asa ceva. Deci cunosteam situatia copiilor minori din penitenci arele din toate aceste tari, care erau romani. Deci stiam lucruri care nu se stiau, ca pentru ca italienii la nivel academic sunt mai deschisi decat la nivel politic unde sunt tot felul de interese. Noi nu aveam nicio problema sa spunem ce vedem si ce gand im. Q: OK. Deci dumneavoastra ati participat in acest program european doi Sau intre timp? droguril criminologie. Bine, in perioada aceea am avut si colaborare cu politia. Ma rog, stiti cum este, nu se poate lucra ca academician stand in birou, ca realitatea nu o vezi decat daca ai legaturi si cu t erenul. Q: Corect. Deci am inteles ca pe langa cercetarea de la Institutul de Criminologie si contactul cu terenul, ati avut si contact direct cu copiii si profesorii? A.L.: Cu inchisorile, am avut munca foarte mare de informare de teren. Q: Cum au fost st abilite obiectivele acestui program? Dumneavoastra ati participat la crearea lor cand v au propus parteneriatul?

PAGE 162

162 A.L.: Da, noi am construit conceptual manualul si am tinut cont de cum sa adaptam cadrul conceptual la metodele moderne de munca ale profesori lor: munca in grup, jocuri interactive, brainstorming uri. Toate aceste tehnici au fost concepute ca sa nu adoarma copiii, sa nu se plictiseasca. Trebuie sa faci acest contact sa fie viu, si atuncea ei sunt mai motivati. Q: Cum ati putea descrie dumneavoas tra implicarea partenerilor in parteneriat? Ma refer la parteneriatul in sine, nu neaparat la programul aplicat copiilor, deci la relatia dumneavoastra cu fundatia, cu ministerul, cu Image. A.L.: Relatia mea cu ministerul este foarte buna, am avut foarte multe intalniri la minister. Relatia mea cu Daniela Calugaru este lunga, de 10 ani, deja ne stim foarte bine; si nu vorbesc numai de minister, vorbesc de intregul corp inspectorii de judete, etc relatiile au fost personale, ii stiu si pe nume, stiu de unde sunt, am facut deplasari impreuna. Iar pe de alta parte, rolul partenerilor nonprofit este sa asigure cat de bine implementarea programului si sa sprijine administrarea, programul, deplasarile, contactele, si comunicarea, ceea ce este o munca foarte g rea. Pe mine, ca parte academica, sincer sa va spun, lucrul asta ma oboseste extraordinar, eu sunt focusata pe continut si cineva trebuie sa ma ajute sa ma duc sa implementez continutul. Dar conditiile implementarii sunt niste lucruri pe care eu personal n u le fac si in legatura cu care beneficiez de un parteneriat intre ONG ul respectiv si minister. Q: Deci ei au alocat si resursele financiare... A.L.: Resursele finaciare, resursele logistice, de exemplu pixuri, mape, sali, computer, toata organizarea ca re este complicata, pentru ca programul la urma. Q: Daca ar fi sa identificati liderul, coordonatorul si purtatorul de cuvant in contextul acestui parteneriat, pe cine ati identi fica? A.L.: Ca lider institutional a fost Daniela Calugaru, iar am uitat sa spun ca au fost si conferinte de presa la care au venit jurnalistii, ca ai nevoie, nu?, sa faca publicitate. Si la conferintele de prea sunt cei care se ocupa de societate, educat ie, sanatate. Cu ei ne am intalnit de asemenea, au vazut cum este programul si cum se desfasoara. Q: Cine a coordonat programul? Cine a tinut legaturile intre parteneri? Cine v a contactat ai des, cine a fost liantul? A.L.: Pai dupa cate stiu eu, Fundatia pentru Pluralism a lucrat cu Image Promotion care s a ocupat de partea aceasta cu mape, genti si cu organizarea unui site in care sigur ca ne am implicat si noi. Si am avut

PAGE 163

163 destul de multe intalniri, pentru a lucrurile nu pot fi toate rezolvate prin e mailuri si telefoane, trebuie sa te si intalnesti. Q: Deci daca ne referim la desfasurarea comunicarii daca tot am ajuns la subiectul asta dumneavoastra spuneti ca au fost mai mult intalniri decat comunicare mediata prin telefon sau e mail? A.L.: Sigu r, sigur, ca sa stabilim ce mutra de copil punem pe coperta, cat de mare sa fie, cate pagini, cum sa l redactam, limbajul, au fost tot felul de intalniri pentru ca, sigur ca lucrurile astea se fac totusi colectiv. Eu nu pot totusi sa primesc un telefon pri n care sa mi se comunice ca se vrea un ghid si eu sa stau acasa, sa l il scriu, si sa l trimit. Trebuie discutat pe parcurs. Cand am adaugat si am extins problema adictiei la Internet si computer, care nu era comuna cand am inceput programul. De asemenea v iolenta, shopping ul. Alcoolul si fumatul sunt deja vechi, old addictions. Q: Sa revenim un pic la intalniri. Cand ati spus intalniri colective, va referiti cu colega dumneavoastra, fundatia, ministerul? Care a fost colectivul care s a reunit de fiecare da ta legat de materiale? A.L.: Cu ministerul, cu Image care a facut site ul, cu Fundatia, cu toti care au fost implicati. Q: Am inteles. Ce mi puteti spune despre finantatori? Au fost ei activi din punctul asta de vedere la intalniri? V ati vazut cu ei? A.L. : Pai sigur ca da. Stiu ca am facut o conferinta de presa minunata la care au venit absolut toti si la care a venit Ministrul Educatiei, Domnul Adomnitei, am fost alaturi de el, am discutat, au venit ziaristii. Deci cum sa spun eu, a existat o contagiune s ociala legata de program. Q: Si ati simtit ca toti partenerii au fost implicati din diverse puncte de vedere: fie financiar, alocare de timp. Deci toata lumea a fost disponibila cand a fost nevoie? A.L.: Da, au fost toti implicati, dar fiecare are un speci fic. Eu, de exemplu, nu inteleg cum se ajunge la ideea de catering la o conferinta de presa sau la o deplasare cu copiii sau cu profesorii. Cineva se ocupa de asta, fiecare are un specific. Eu personal sunt implicata in continut. Dar in administrare, mai d egraba ceilalti. Stiti foarte bine, peste tot se intampla asa. Q: Cine a planificat comunicarea? Cine a coordonat comunicarea intre parteneri? Cine a fost cu initiativa intalnirilor? Ma refer la coordonatorul din punct de vedere al comunicarii intre parten eri? A.L.: Nu cred ca a fost cineva care sa comunice. Dar tin minte ca Daniela Calugaru ne chema, pe de alta parte si mie mi s a intamplat sa spun ca

PAGE 164

164 vreau un feedback legat de continut si sa vina toti; era suficient sa spun la cineva, pentru ca informati a se circula in retea. Q: Nu mi ati spus cine a fost purtatorul de cuvant al acestui parteneriat catre public, catre presa. A.L.: Ministerul si cu mine. Q: Au existat la un moment dat, de a lungul timpului, bariere de comunicare cauzate de diferentele di ntre parteneri? Ca ati lucrat cu companii private, cu ONG uri, dumneavoastra sunteti psiholog, agentia face cu totul altceva, deci sunt diverse, sa zic, culturi organizationale. Au existat la un moment dat bariere de comunicare legate de aceste diferente? A.L.: Nu, nu mi s a parut. Nu mi s a parut pentru ca a existat dupa parerea mea un foarte mare respect pentru ograda fircaruia. Eu nu pot sa dau sfaturi finantatorului si finantatorul nu poate sa mi spuna mie de ce am am calcat pe picioare sau sa avem conflicte. Nu a existat asa ceva. Q: Deci fiecare a avut putere de decizie pe bucatica lui, ca sa zic asa. A.L.: Sigur, sigur. Q: Ce mi puteti spune despre dedicarea partenerilor? Cum ati percep ut o dumneavoastra. A.L.: Au fost foarte implicati si au vrut ca lucrurile sa se desfasoare bine, pentru ca e la mijloc si o chestie de imagine. Absolut. Si faptul ca foarte multi profesori care nu erau in program, cereau sa intre in program, imprumutau c artile; am vazut profesori care au spus ca nu a fost nimeni din scoala lor pentru ca sunt atatea scoli. Datorita acestor doua programe am lucrat cu UNICEF ul pe violenta in scoala, program national cu Institutul de Stiintele Educatiei. Deci vreau sa spun ca se stiu lucrurile astea, nu au ramas izolate. Iar acest proces de comunicare este pozitiv, pentru ca trebuie sa se stie. Q: Deci au fost beneficii pentru parteneri la nivel de imagine? A.L.: Sigur. Q: Si aici ne referim la toata lumea minister, c ompanii de tutun, fundatie... A.L.: Absolut. Q: Ce mi puteti spune despre rezultatele pe plan social, adica impactul pe care l a avut programul pentru rofesori, pentru copii, daca l ati masurat de a lungul timpului?

PAGE 165

165 A.L.: Au fost tabere, au fost eseuri, s au dat premii, s au transmis prin televiziune, si acum exista spoturi; nu se poate spune ca nu s au bucurat de acceptare si sustinere sociala. Q: Am inteles. Ma refeream si la faptul daca exista vreun rezultat ca impact al progrmului, de exemplu daca a sc azut violenta in randul adolescentilor. A.L.: Pot sa spun ca a crescut numarul de voluntari la unele ONG uri. Faptul ca romanii care nu au fibra asociativa nu discut de ce la tineri se incepe sa fie atractiva ideea de voluntariat. Si nu atat ca sa faca bine intr un curriculum vitae, dar si pentru faptul ca socializeaza; si e preferabila aceasta varianta de socializare decat cea din cluburi sau de pe Internet. Q: Dar aceasta crestere a numarului de voluntari afost datorita programului? A.L.: Cred ca toat e trei programele, avand aceeasi dsfasurare in scoala, au structurat o miscare la nivelul copiilor. Sa stiti ca unii sunt extraordinar de devotati. Si este foarte bine, pentru ca tu i dai undita, si el se duce sa prinda pestii. Q: Am inteles. Stiu ca s au facut chestionare si sondaje la fiecare final de an scolar, sa se ia pulsul elevilor si ce le place si ce s a mai schimbat. Exista undeva aceste rezultate? A.L.: Cred ca exista evaluari la scoli, pentru ca profesorii au vrut sa faca evaluari dupa ce s au tinut aceste programe optionale. Si sunt si profesori care au solicitat sa intre in program. In plus, exista un raport cu o cifra uriasa a copiilor implicati in program, Daniela Calugaru stie. Dar asta cu masuratorile este o chestie complicata: ce indicato ri... e complicat. Plus ca luna. Eu am lucrat in statistici cand eram la criminologie si am facut dinamica pe pe 15 ani cu violenta pe diferite categorii si era o schimbare extraordin ara de la an la an: si ani rai, si ani mai buni, si nu vreau sa va mai spun ca si raportarea de catre politie si cu procesele nu se imbina, si asa mai departe. Adica e foarte complicat de organizat lucrul asta. Stiu ca nemtii au un program foarte bun in sc oli, dar la noi nu stiu de ce nu s a aplicat. Nemtii au o fisa cu tipurile de violenta care se da in fiecare scoala directorului scolii, si la sfarsitul lunii directorul, dupa ce colecteaza informatii de la toti profesorii, da aceasta fisa la politie; aste a se aduna si se face o centralizare in final. Dar asta duce la ideea aceea pe care v am spus o, aceea a unui observator national, pentru ca vorbim de o mnitorizare care necesita un aparat de lucru. Q: Ultima intrebare, doamna Liiceanu: daca ar fi sa facet i o lista cu cei mai importanti factori care au contribuit la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi?

PAGE 166

166 Q: La intreg programul inceput in 1998. A.L.: Cred ca Ministerul Educatiei; daca ai o relatie buna s i gasesti acolo oameni care sa fie implicati si motivati, cred ca este foarte important. Pe de alta parte, cum este acum programul cu sanatatea, este o colaborare foarte buna intre Tineri pentru Tineri si minister, alta fundatie, care este mai mare decat F undatia pentru Pluralism, cu o echipa mai mare de voluntari. Q: Am inteles. Si Fundatia pentru Pluralism a fost mai putin implicata din cauza marimii? A.L.: Este o organizatie mult mai mica si nu se ocupa de tineri propriu zis, asa ca asta, Tineri pentru T ineri, este focusata pe problemele adolescentilor. Q: Atunci aveti idee de ce a intrat in parteneriat din moment ce nu se ocupa de tineri? de toate. Deci nu se poate spune ca nu participa. Dar Tineri pentru Tineri este mai cunoscut si axat pe adolescenti, deci este o relatie foarte stransa. Ministerul Educatiei, va mai p uteti gandi la alti factori care au contribuit la succesul parteneriatului? A.L.: Sincer sa va spun, poate si faptul ca eu personal, l am facut cu o placere nebuna si am fost extraordinar de motivata, mi a facut placere sa fac acest lucru, mai ales ca iese am din discursul strict academic, de revista, de congrese, de chestii care sunt seci. Poate ca si lucrul acesta. Conteaza si relatia dintre noi, dar si motivatia. Este important. Q: Pentru ca ati vorbit de relatii, credeti ca relatia dumneavoastra cu membr acestui parteneriat? A.L.: Da, fara indoiala. Si nu ma refer la relatiile de structura formala, pur si simplu bucuriile mintii, cand ai acesta dimensiune intr o comunicare. Ca poate sa fie foarte eficient construit, dar daca nu are acea aura care ti o da bucuria intelegerii si nu este un parteneriat care sa fie friendly, profund friendly, nu merg lucrurile pe termen lung. Q: Ma bucur ca ati avut o experienta atat de placuta.

PAGE 167

167 A.L.: Da, d Q: Eu va multumesc foarte tare pentru interviul acordat si va doresc o seara placuta. A.L.: Cu placere, la fel. In depth interview, Februar y 14, 2011 timp sunteti implicata personal? M.N.: Rolul meu a fost de coordonator al programului din partea British American Tobacco si am fost implicata din 2006. Q M.N.: Ma ocup de toate aspectele programului dezvoltarea lui, partea de logistica, implementarea cerintelor BAT in cadrul programului, dezvoltare de parteneriate. Q: Din cate stiu eu, componenta parteneriatului din punctul de vedere al organizatiilor membre, a ramas constanta de a lungul timpului. M.N.: Da. Q: Stiu insa ca reprezentantii s au mai schimbat din partea companiilor. Pe perioada in care ati fost dumneavoastra implicata, s au schimbat oamenii cu care ati colaborat, si daca da, cum credeti ca au afectat aceste schimbari dinamica parteneriatului? M.N.: Da, s au schimbat oamenii de alungul timpului, si normal ca au avut un impact schimbarile respective, pentru ca depinde foarte mult de oamenii cu care lu crezi. Q: In ce sens a fost acest impact? M.N.: De exemplu am avut destul de multe schimbari la nivelul fundatiei, care ne au retinut programul. Q: Doamna Liana Popa nu a fost constanta acolo? Pentru ca din cate stiu eu dumneaei a fost de la inceput. M.N. : Da, dar in prima parte a parteneriatului a fost altcineva, si a fost o persoana mult mai dedicata programului decat doamna Popa. Q: OK. Si doamna Popa a fost implicata mai mult de cand ati intrat dumneavoastra in program sau de mai inainte?

PAGE 168

168 M.N.: Da. Au fost schimbari si la nivelul partenerului si Philip Morris a schimbat persoanele dar aici nu au existat probleme; bine, si avand aceleasi scopuri, normal ca ajungi foarte repede la consensuri. Q: Ce rol au jucat beneficiarii copiii, profesorii si pa rintii in satbilirea si implementarea acestui program si cum credeti ca aceasta a afectat programul in sine? M.N.: Normal ca au rolul cel mai important pentru ca noi customizam programul in functie de cerintele lor; si dezvoltarile ulterioare au avut la baza, sa spunem, cerintele parintilor si, speram noi, si ale copiilor, pentru ca le am colectat prin intermediul profesorilor. Q: Am inteles, deci contactul cel mai des il aveti cu profesorii prin traininguri, din cate am inteles eu.. M.N.: Da, prin train inguri si prin feedback ul pe care il trimit constant, periodic Ministerului Educatiei. Q: A existat o relatie intre BAT si ceilalti membrii ai parteneriatului inainte de formarea lui, din cate stiti dumneavoastra? Mai colaborasera inainte? M.N.: Acum dep a schimbat si a fost reimplementat, relansat. Vorbim de cand am fost eu implicata sau de cand a aparut ideea de program educational? Q : Din cate stiti dumneavoastra. M.N.: Parteneriatul a fost preluat de mine chiar in componenta in care s a lansat: BAT, PM, implementat de agentia Image PR cu suportul Ministerului Educatiei si Cercetarii, de unde a fost de la inceput o singura persoana im plicata e vorba de doamna Calugaru si chiar si cu aceeasi fundatie, cu oameni diferiti. Doamna Liiceanu s a ocupat de la inceput de program partea editoriala. Q: Si cand s a format parteneriatul, membrii erau noi unii pentru altii sau se cunosteau de dinainte? M.N.: Aceasta nu am de unde sa stiu. Oricum doamna Liiceanu era un nume cunoscut inca de atunci, doamna Calugaru cred ca a fost constanta pe partea aceasta de programe educationale. Q: Bun, multumesc frumos. M.N.: Iar fundatia cred ca era o fun datie cu care mai colaborase PM. Q: Cum ati descrie nivelul de implicare al partenerilor si cum a evoluat el de a lungul timpului?Mi ati spus ca fundatia a avut suisuri si coborasuri, ca sa spun asa. Puteti sa

PAGE 169

169 mi dati un exemplu? Dar despre ceilalti parten eri ce puteti sa mi spuneti din acest punct de vedere? M.N.: Pai sa incepem cu ministerul; ministerul a fost foarte implicat, chiar a iubit ideea parteneriatului si ideea programului, l a sustinut si de aceea este si in curricula si se intampla la nivel n ational. Doamna Liiceanu crede in program si este in mod constant implicata in dezvoltarea si updatarea manualului. Noi si PM pe partea de sustinere, de dezvoltare, de suport acordat financiar si colaborare pe materiale. Q: Si fundatia? M.N.: Fundatia i n ultima perioada a avut un rol destul de marginal, n au fost implicati decat in partea de logistica si de primire a diverselor cerinte... dar nici nu stiu daca [au fost implicati] in asta, pentru ca mai mult [cerintele] se duc la Ministerul Educatiei. Au dat feedback pe program si mai nou pe construirea site ului dedicat programului. Q: Fundatia nu se ocupa cu trainingurile profesorilor? M.N.: Nu, nu sunt implicati deloc ei, trainingurile sunt organizate de agentie cu suportul, de fapt cu prezenta, Ministe rului Educatiei si a coordonatorului editorial, doamna Liiceanu. Q: Ca intensitate a comunicarii intre parteneri, ce mi puteti spune despre nivelul de implicare? Sunt ei toti interesati sa comunice, exista diferente; de exemplu dumneavoastra, BAT, comunica ti mai mult cu unii dintre parteneri decat cu altii? M.N.: Nu, comunicarea e in mod egal cu toata lumea. Q: Toate acestea, au variat ele de a lungul timpului, sau au ramas constante? Implicarea: finantarea, comunicarea, si asa mai departe. M.N.: Au fost co nstante, mai putin partea de fundatie, care s a atenuat treptat, treptat. Q: OK. Cand va referiti la ultima perioada [cand fundatia a fost mai putin activa], va referiti la perioada in care ati fost dumneavoastra implicata, din 2007?. M.N.: La inceput a fo st mai activa, acum este mai putin activa. S au mai schimbat prioritatile, interesul. Q: Deci sa zicem de doi trei ani incoace? M.N.: Da.

PAGE 170

170 Q: OK. O sa va rog in continuare sa identificati trei oameni sau organizatii in cadrul parteneriatului care au fost: l ider, coordonator, si purtator de cuvant in program, nu neaparat in cadrul BAT. M.N.: E destul de greu de identificat. Din ce punct de vedere? Cum a fost perceput de publicul larg, sau la ce sa ma refer? Q: La interactiunea dintre membrii parteneriatului. Cum ati perceput dumneavoastra. M.N.: Lider putem sa spunem ca am fost noi companiile; coordonatorul cu siguranta a fost agentia, Image; iar purtator de cuvant, sa spunem ca este un rol impartit intre doamna Calugaru si doamna Liiceanu intre minister si coordonatorul materialelor. Q: Cum au fost stabilite obiectivele programului? Acum eu stiu ca dumneavoastra nu ati fost de la inceput, dar cum au evoluat ele, daca au evoluat, pe parcurs? Au fost ele negociate, renegociate, sau au ramas stabile? M.N.: Ob iectivele au fost de la inceput foarte clare pentru ca sunt obiectivele ideii de program; fumatul juvenil reprezinta o problema pentru ambele companii si e normal ca prevenirea fumatului juvenil este obiectivul oricarui parteneriat pe subiectul acesta. Nor mal ca au fost dezvoltate in timp, in ideea mai mult a masurarii eficientei si al dezvoltarii din punctul asta de vedere, dar clar obiectivele au fost de la inceput stabilite, n au fost negociate, renegociate, pentru ca au coincis. fiecarui partener implicat? M.N.: Da. Q: Din ce punct de vedere? Imi puteti da un exemplu? M.N.: V am spus, e o problema comuna a companiilor, o problema recunoscuta pe care fiecare incearca sa o rezol ve. Q: Dar ce mi puteti spune despre ceilalti parteneri? Cum au coincis obiectivele cu ale lor? Ale fundatiei, ministerului, doamnei Liiceanu? M.N.: Fundatia avea implicare dar printre obiectivele ei era dezvoltarea tineretului in Romania; dupa aceea, doa mna Liiceanu, prin prisma profesiei dansei a fost bineinteles interesata si a corespuns... mai ales ca programul nu se refera strict la prevenirea fumatului juvenil, are mai multe componente, in general tratarea adictiilor si, normal, fiind de profesie p siholog, i a fost foarte usor sa dezvolte acest program. Q: Deci am inteles ca s a pornit de la fumatul juvenil si apoi s a extins?

PAGE 171

171 M.N.: Nu, de la inceput a fost complex; nu am tratat numai prevenirea fumatului juvenil pentru ca un asemenea program era m ult prea de nisa ca sa rezolve o problema educationala; deci de la inceput a tratat consumul de alcool, sexul, toate problemele de care se lovesc adolescentii. Q: Am inteles, bine. Cum a fost gestionata comunicarea intre parteneri de a lungul timpului? Pri n ce mijloace? Mai mult directa sau mediata? M.N.: Normal ca mijloacele de comunicare au diferit de a lungul timpului. La inceput au avut loc foarte multe intalniri, pentru ca atunci efectiv se contura programul si normal ca aveam nevoie de discutii face to face. Bine, normal ca au fost foarte multe intalniri, dar dublate de comunicare scrisa: mail, rapoarte si altele. Dupa aceea, in ultima perioada intalnirile s au mai rarit si sunt mai multe raportari ce s a intamplat in perioada respectiva, [trimise] la sfarsit de perioada si de dezvoltare a actiunilor viitoare si dupa aceea se comunica foarte mult in scris sau telefonic. Q: Deci sunt una doua intalniri anuale de raportare? M.N.: Nu, nu, sunt patru cinci, cam asa. Q: Cine a gestionat comunicarea in p arteneri? A existat un liant? M.N.: Cred ca un rol foarte important aici l a avut agentia; dar fiecare cand avea ceva de comunicat, sau avea o problema, normal ca deschidea o linie de comunicare. Q: Cu toti partenerii? M.N.: Cu siguranta tot timpul intre n oi PM, BAT si agentie si, in functie de necesitati, ceilalti parteneri. Erau chestii pur si simplu de logistica pentru care nu era nevoie sa implicam ministerul sau coordonatorul stiintific, lucruri de genul asta. Q: Am inteles. Au existat bariere de c omunicare de a lungul timpului intre parteneri? Si daca da, cum au fost ele depasite? Puteti sa mi dati un exemplu? M.N.: Nu, nu cred ca am avut probleme. Q: Nici cu fundatia atunci cand au devenit mai putin activi? M.N.: Nu neaparat. Intr adevar, sa spu nem ca au existat nemultumiri datorita modului in care a colaborat fundatia, dar am rezolvat problemele si am trecut peste. Q: Pot sa va intreb cum le ati rezolvat? Ce strategie de rezolvare ati avut?

PAGE 172

172 M.N.: Au ascultat doleantele celor nemultumiti si am me diat cu fundatia rezolvarea respectivelor probleme. Q: Deci nemultumirile au venit de la fundatie, din moment ce dumneavoastra ati ascultat? M.N.: Nu, nemultumirile au venit din partea echipei stiintifice care a intampinat probleme din partea fundatiei. Q: Va referiti la doamna Liiceanu? M.N.: Da, si membrii echipei dumneaei. Q: Ce mi puteti spune despre rezultatele acestui parteneriat: pe plan social in termeni de beneficii pentru parinti, copii, profesori; si apoi pe planul beneficiilor pentru parteneri c a parte a acestui program? M.N.: Beneficii foarte impoartante au fost faptul ca acest program se preda acum la orele de dirigentie la scolile generale clasele cinci opt in toata tara; am observat de la an la an o imbunatatire a intelegerii programului si a modului in care se implementeaza; observam din traininguri, pentru ca intrebarile sunt foarte mult pe continut, pe detalii; adica se vede ca programul este efectiv implementat. Speram sa si aiba rezultatele scontate la copii. Asta nu putem sa masuram si chiar nu avem de unde sa stim. Dar faptul ca elevii participa si au intrebari, isi intra in roluri la respectivele ore de dirigentie sunt semne bune ca programul are succes. Suntem de asemenea incantati ca tot timpul se updateaza manualul ca si contin ut. Doamna Liiceanu observa noi adictii si le adauga manualului. Q: Cam cat de des? M.N.: In fiecare an are propuneri de updatare. Nu s a modificat ca atare manualul, dar s au facut materiale aditionale. Anul trecut am dezvoltat si un site dedicat program ului si am avut prezenta si din partea copiilor si din partea parintilor pe site. Ministerul Educatiei este multumit de program si ne ajuta cu transmiterea informatiilor in teritoriu si cu transmiterea feedback ului din teritoriu catre noi. Q: Daca ne ref erim la beneficiile pentru parteneri, pentru organizatiile implicate, care revin din statutul de membru in acest parteneriat, ce mi puteti spune despre BAT in primul rand? M.N.: Nu pot sa spun ca noi l am comunicat in mod activ ca program al nostru, pentru ca mai mult decat beneficiile de imagine conteaza cele de responsabilitate sociala. Noi am conceput si am dezvoltat acest program ca un program de responsabilitate sociala, unde conteaza foarte mult rezultatele; am fi foarte multumiti sa stim ca scade fum atul juvenil si ca

PAGE 173

173 aceasta se intampla si datorita programului nostru. Acesta este scopul principal. Q: Deci schimbarea la nivel social e cel mai important beneficiu al dumneavoastra? M.N.: Da. Asta este beneficiul principal. Q: Si apoi? M.N.: Dupa aceea b ineinteles ca urmeaza cele normale de imagine, de recunoastere a responsabilitatii, de percepere a companiei ca si companie rsponsabila, preocupata de problemele pe care le creaza si implicata in rezolvarea lor. Q: Deci il comunicati la nivel guvernamenta l, ca lobby? M.N.: Nu il comunicam in mod activ, dar se afla. El exista in comunicarea generala ca si program de care ne ocupam, dar spuneam ca nu se face in mod activ sa dezvltam o campanie publicitara in care sa mentionam ca noi sustinem programul educ ational; dar destul de multa lume stie de program si il apreciaza ca atare. Chiar in discutii cu parlamentari, a venit din partea lor mentiunea ca e foarte bine ca facem asemenea programe, de exemplu. Q: In cadrul unui lobby? M.N.: Nu neaparat in cadrul un ui lobby, ne referim la discutii avute cu diverse persoane din spectrul politic. Dar nu este singura comunitate in care discutam despre parteneriat. Q: Ce mi puteti spune despre distributia puterii in cadrul parteneriatului? M.N.: Fiecare cu specificul lu i. De exemplu, noi eram puterea financiara, doamna Liiceanu si echipa reprezentau, sa spunem, colectivul redactional deci fara dansii nu se putea face nimic. Normal ca ministerul avea drept de aprobare, drept de veto, pentru ca nimic nu se intampla fara acordul lor. Dar nu pot sa spun ca cineva a avut putere absoluta in parteneriat. Q: Deci fiecare cu expertiza si activitatile lui. M.N.: Exact. Q: Ultima intrebare: daca ar fi sa faceti o lista cu cei mai importanti factori care au contribuit la succesul parteneriatului, care ar fi ea? M.N.: Factori?

PAGE 174

174 Q: Da, va puteti referi la modalitati de interactiune intre parteneri, la oameni, la.. M.N.: Da, bineinteles, interactiunea si implicarea fiecaruia a contat foarte mult. A contat foarte mult ca au fost oamen i cu interes pentru subiect; fiecare din cei implicati au crezut in proiect si de aceea s a si intamplat. Alti factori... faptul ca era necesar un astfel de program, pentru ca in sistemul educational romanesc nu exista un astfel de program care sa mearga p e educatie civica, educatie in general a adolescentilor; a fost unul din primele astfel de programe implementate in sistemul educational romanesc. Si bineinteles, faptul ca au fost tratate probleme de interes pentru adolescenti. Q: Deci interactiunea, impl icarea partenerilor si relevanta subiectului. M.N.: Da, si interesul pe care l au avut in parteneriat si faptul ca a raspuns unei necesitati a sistemului educational romanesc. In depth interview, February 18, 2011 Q: Cum ati fost dumneavoastra, corpul pro fesoral, si elevii implicati in crearea si Mehedinti? M.U.: Acesta este un program mai vechi inceput ca pilot in 1999. Sigur s a extins si problematica programului si s a creat consilierilor scolari si este foarte bine situata problema pentru ca consilierea inseamna informare si formare, indiferent ca este vorba de varsta mica sa u de varsta mare. In cazul acesta, noi dascalii facem educatie, da? Si atunci dirigintii, pe langa dezvoltarea responsabilitatilor individuale legate de decizie, trebuie sa si dezvolte copii astia ca sunt la o varsta...ma ro... de luat hotarari, trebuie sa si dezvolte si atitudinea critica. In cazul acest copiii acestia trebuie sa cunoasca din generation gaps, din problematica dezvoltata in orice stat de cand e lumea, in orice stat indiferent de situatia istoica si sociala, de orice tip, lupta aceasta dintr e generatii, care nu functioneaza. Multi dintre copii nu stiu cum sa o gestioneze, sau nu stiu parintii sa se apropie din diferite cauze si motive, nu iti descriu eu acuma, pentru ca s au facut destule analize de a lungul timpului. La nivelul urmator, intr a dascalul in ecuatie, pentru ca aici in scoala de exemplu sunt doua situatii: o data dirigintele consilierul si aceasta disciplina s a putut include nu neaparat actualmente, adica din septembrie, dar pana in septembrie era CDS, curriculum la decizia scoli i, adica optionalele. Pe ce teme? Pe tematicile cerute. Este vorba de sanatate, de cunostinte. Cum sa l faci pe copilul ala sa se lase de fumat, sau inceputul vietii sexuale, sau cum sa te implici activ in toate felurile de activitati educative. Ei, ce pro stii lasati ma in pace, voi adultii... ei noi ce am facut... [conversatie intrerupta]

PAGE 175

175 Q: Aceasta disciplina a fost la decizi scolii pana in 2009? Si apoi? M.U.: Da, pentru ca acum s au facut foarte multe reduceri si aceste ore care sunt optionale, CDS se h otaraste in functie de necesitati la fiecare unitate scolara si in functie de profesori, bineinteles, daca considera ca este nevvoie si asa mai departe. Dar s a facut un program pentru sanatate, de exemplu, absolut obligatoriu la nivelul judetului venit de la primarie; mai exact la clasele a treia si a patra. Ele vin la noi la inspectorat, le semnam si le implementam. Apoi mai sunt programele de promovare pe care le facem pentru ca ministerul.. eu colaborez cu ei in mod deosebit... si ei imi trimit material e educative si as putea spune ca chiar acum o saptamana jumatate, am primit niste pliante foarte importante. Pliantele in sine... cat poti sa tii atentia copilului treaza? Depinde de varsta, nu? La aia mici la jumatate de ora trebuie facuta o pauza, o acti vitate, la cei mari se face probabil la 50 de minute. Ei, dar daca le mai dai si aceste pliante care nu sunt mai mult de doua pagini un A4 indoit cu rosu, albastru, si scrie... ca acuma spun din memorie...cetatenia activa, pornind de la Fericirea se Nas te din Sanatate, adica se te implici, sau Vreau sa Fiu Mare ai grija de sanatatea ta, ce visezi sa faci mai departe, increderea in tine, igiena ta, ai grija sa nu te accidentezi, sa mananci sanatos, fumatul si consecintele lui, adica a fost asa o avalans a. Deci astea sunt materiale pe care le distribuim. Deci o data ne intalnim cu consilierii scolari fiecare unitate de invatamant, fiecare scoala, fie mica, fie mare, are un consilier scolar si eu si colegul meu care se ocupa de educatia nonformala si l e dam, fiecare in parte, diverse pliante. De asmenea voiam sa spun ca actualmente ce se intampla se face o formare pe trei categorii: pe factorii educationali care sunt acestia pe care ti i am enumerat. La sedinta cu directorii, va rugam consilieii scolare i, avem sedinta de instruire si atuncea ei se duc si fac si treaba asta, numai ca ei pot sa si faca echipa extinsa. Deci formare pentru cine? Pentru acesti consilieri, pentru factorii de decizie inspectorii si elevi voluntari; si aicea s au facut consi liile elevilor la nivel judetean, adica din fiecare scoala sunt si elevi. Ei participa si normal ca sunt interesati, normal ca la aceste intalniri, ii lasi sa spuna, ii lasi sa vorbeasca; deci n am facut numai informare, noi am avut si concursuri, am avut si promovare. Normal acolo faci stitul de viata sanatos, dezvoltarea spiritului, egalitatea de gen, transmiterea valorilor umane fundamentale, sanatatea mediului, si asa mai departe. S au facut concursuri tematice si atncea am anuntat din vreme pentru tot judetul, am avut concursuri pentru dezvoltarea activitatilor sportive, artistice sau practice, sau debate uri, activitati in care ei se implica. Erau concursuri interesante, cu premii. Fiecare judet isi organiza chestia asta cum putea mai mult, facea fise, noi am inclus aceste teme si la balul bobocilor. Intotdeauna tinerii faceau un comitet consiliul elevilor se numeste deci acestia fiecare veneau cu intrebarile lor si discutam despre valorile lor, despre pace, libertate, securitatea familiei. Alte ori se faceau concursuri de eseuri pe diverse teme, pentru ca unora le e mai usor sa se exprime in scris

PAGE 176

176 dezbateri, si aici a jucat un rol foarte important ambasada marii Britanii si acum Ambasada Statelor Unite pentru ca ne au introdus aceasta idee de un timp prestabilit trei minute, cinci minute cu echipe pro si contra. Un lucru foarte u til, pe tematici specifice varstei. Q: Tot ce mi ziceti acum se intampla la nivel de judet pe mai multe M.U.: Da, asta vreau sa toa te aceste componente. Acuma in anul asta nu s a intamplat mare lucru pe program, dar pana in vacanta de vara am avut foarte multe actiuni, foarte implicate si diversificate; dar intotdeauna, ca antet, am avut chestia asta. Q: Primiti materiale de la minis ter? Pornind de la acest ghid dumneavoastra aduceti materiale suplimentare si creati activitati? Sunt activitatile inspirate de acest ghid? ma exprim plastic. La noi biblia este curriculumul, adica programa. Si cand faci o disciplina, eu am spus ca ea se descarca si in activitatile dirigintelui, ale consilierului, si in activitatile extrascolare, dar si in scoala ca materie optionala. Dar totul incepe de la programul de baza, al carui autor este doamna Liiceanu, un academician de marca. Dar din punctul meu de vedere ca inspector, eu trebuie sa ma intalnesc cu oamenii, consilierii, si le spun sa descarce toate aceste informatii in scoala. In scoala este comisia dirigintilor si atun cea in sedinta consiliului profesoral aceste informatii se discuta si se face un program de actiune, de activitate. Cine are acest CDS, are o ora pe saptamana in care isi dezvolta un program clar care este aprobat in continuare de inspectorat. Iar extrasco lar exista un plan national si unul la nivel de judet. Si fiecare scoala participanta vine cu propuneri de activitati, pentru ca ei vor sa se implice. Hai sa ti spun altceva: aceste activitati, bazate de multe ori pe parteneriate locale, se descarca si pr ofesorii primesc puncte. Punctele valoreaza ca activitate in fisa postului si o data pe an se face evaluarea pentru salariul de merit si gradatia de merit. Si tu ca profesori, aduni puncte din toate activitatile desfasurate, asta fiind si ea una foarte imp ortanta. Pentru ca o faci, ca saptamanal ai dirigentie, si daca tot o faci, de ce nu poti sa faci un lucru frumos pentru elevi? Pentru ca lumea imi spune: pai sunteti platiti ca diriginti. Da, corect, si de aceea nu toi dirigintii de implica in aceste acti vitati. Fiecare scoala are o echipa mai mare sau mai mica de oameni implicati in acest tip de concursuri extrascolare. Dar chiar functioneaza aceasta activitate competitionala. Am Dupa aceea am facut si follow up, deci daca le a placut. Si daca da, se mai organizeaza activitati de gen in cadrul scolilor. Noi facem evenimente si cu

PAGE 177

177 mass media, si atunci ei sunt si motivati. Aceastea sunt instrumentele de lucru pe care noi le folosi m in cadrul acestui program. Insa, bineinteles, ajuta foarte mult cand poti sa si distribui aceste materiale; bine, acum exista si Internetul, si copiii astia sunt destepti, si vin si ei cu multe noutati si completari. Sincer, e o placere sa lucrezi cu ele vii. La nivel de minister, exista trei doamne: una numai pe proiecte si doua doamne pe educatie nonformala si cea cu dirigintii. La nivelul inspectoratului, eu am un coleg, iar el este acum, de joi plecat, la un curs national de formare la Herculane pe un program de sanatate, Fericirea se Naste din Sanatate. M.U.: Nu, n am participat. N am avut aceasta bucurie, iar la noi exact cand a debutat acest program era un alt inspec tor, iar la debut a participat dansul. Q: Dumneavoastra sunteti din 1999 in inspectorat? M.U.: Da, dar am fost mult timp inspector pe limbi moderne. Acum, din toamna anului trecut, am trecut pe proiecte educationale. Q: Au existat programe de evaluare in Cum s a colectat feedback din partea elevilor la nivel de scoala sau judet? M.U.: Da, avem, dar eu sunt acasa, si nu ma pot uita acum pe calculator. Trebuie sa ma duc la birou sa vad ce am in calculator si v a trimit. Q: Credeti ca mi puteti recomanda un consilier care a implementat acest program in scoala? M.U.: Problema e ca sunt foarte multe modificari. Consilierii se tot schimba... deci nu va ajuta daca va arunc un nume si persoana respectiva e noua si nu stie despre ce e vorba. Trebuie sa verific inainte. Directorii se schimba si ei, si este greu de aflat cine a fost implicat pana la urma. Asta este, ce sa facem, se schimba si culorile politice, se fac multe restructurari in perioada asta. minister, companii private si o fundatie. Sunteti la curent cu componenta parteneriatului? Si daca da, cum credeti ca aceasta formula a afectat implementarea programului la nivel teritoria l? M.U.: Da, stiu, pentru ca a fost anuntat in mod foarte transparent, s a facut lansarea programului, in decembrie 2007, si parca Fundatia pentru Pluralism era implicata. Stiu ca in fisa mea de post exista mentiunea

PAGE 178

178 pluralism educational, deci se leaga. Stiu ca a fost sprijinit de minister, ca s a lansat ghidul practic pentru diriginti, stiu ca este finantat de Philip Morris Romania si British American Tobacco parca, si din cate stiu eu a fost si un de mult, dar nu am fost noi neaparat implicati de atunci. Sigur, ei fiind din Bucuresti, au inceput cu Bucurestiul, dar uite ca au crescut, si au facut temele bine, au lucrat serios si sincer tematica este foarte actuala. Ca psihologi, ei au atins niste p uncte foarte importante, de aceea au avut si impact. Q: Dumneavoastra cu ministerul ati atinut legatura, nu? M.N.: Da, noi primim informatii, implementam si reinformam despre ce s a implementat si exista inclusiv un calendar de activitati. Raportam lunar s i anual la minister, deci nu am intrat in contact cu alti organizatori. Mie personal mi a placut in mod deosebit acest program. Stiu ca fostul meu coleg era tot timpul plecat la tot felul de formari. In depth interview, February 18, 2011 Q: Sa incepem cu prima intrebare: De cand s A.V.: Programul s a lansat in 2007 si in acest moment teoretic toate scolile un program mai amplu, Educatie pentru Sanatate, care se face in fiecare clasa in orele de dirgentie. Deci programul functioneaza din 200 7 si este un modul in cadrul acestui mare program, Educatie pentru Sanatate. Q: Am inteles. Dumneavoastra sunteti implicata in program? A.V.: Nu, nu, deci suntem pe doua pozitii diferite; colega mea se ocupa de aceste programe educationale, eu ma ocup de p roiecte europene. Dar nicio problema, eu am vorbit cu colega mea, care este oricum foarte noua in functie, doar de patru luni. Colegul care s a ocupat de acest program care l a lansat pentru ca am inteles ca la Sibiu s a lansat, a iesit a pensie. Iar d ansul la lansare a invitat absolut toate scolile, deci reprezentantii consilieri educativi ai scolilor din judet si le a povestit despre acest program. Am inteles ca s au facut si ceva cursuri de formare entru cate o persoana din scoli. Si exista si un man ual, un ghid practic. Q: Ce rol au coordonatorii la nivel teritorial, deci colega dumneavoastra, legat de acest program in cadrul inspectoratului? A.V.: Deci colega mea in momentul in care merge intr o monitorizare in scoala, verifica daca in cadrul plani ficarilor anuale pe disciplina consiliere si

PAGE 179

179 orientare pentru ca asa se numeste dirigentia acum daca exista acest modul, daca este folosit. Asa monitorizam programul. Q: Deci prin vizite la clasa? A.V.: Exact, vizite de monitorizare. Avem inspectii tem atice, si asta se intampla relativ des, sau la solicitarea scolilor care doresc evaluare externa. Mergem si verificam si dosarul consilierului educativ pentru ca de aceasta zona extracuriculara, respectiv si acest program, la nivel de scoala se ocupa consi lierul educativ. In fiecare scoala exista o astfel de persoana. Q: La inspectorat pastrati legatura cu ministerul si dupa aceea implementati in scoli? A.V.: Da, noi ca institutie facem legatura intre unitatile de invatamant din judetul respectiv si minist er. Noi ne subordonam ministerului si aplicam politicile si programele ministerului in teritoriu. Si exista inspectori pe diferite domenii. Q: Imi puteti spune, va rog, ce rol ati jucat dumneavoastra ca inspectorat sau ca si corp profesoral in crearea si i mplementarea acestui program? Ati fost consultati legat de materiale? Mi ati povestit si despre niste traininguri. A.V.: Nu stiu sa va spun exact, pentru ca s a ocupat colegul nostru care a iesit la pensie in toamna, dar din moment ce colegul nostru si al ti cativa colegi au fost solicitati sa participe la forare, probabil rolul nostru a fost doar sa fim formati pentru ca mai departe, in teritoriu, persoanele cheie formate sa transmita mai departe informatia si sa fie formati in continuare pentru utilizarea acestui ghid practic. Deci nu stiu sa fi fost noi implicati in vreun fel in elaborarea manualului. Din cate stiu, autorul manualului este chiar responsabilul la nivel de minister al inspectorilor pe aceste programe extracurriculare, Daniela Calugaru. Deci la nivel de minister s a elaborat ghidul iar noi in teritoriu implementam. Q: Am inteles. Ati fost in contact permanent cu ministerul? De cate ori se intampla raportari pe acest program? A.V.: Raportari se fac la nivel de minister pe toate programele care functioneaza si cu siguranta si acest program este prins, dar raportarile noastre la minister se fac la inceput de an scolar sau la sfarsit de an scolar, depinde. Si este pe tot anul scolar. Discutand cu colega mea, care acum se ocupa de zona aceasta, din cate stiu chiar se face acest modul si este binevenit pentru elevi, si este in concordanta cu cerintele curriculumului national. Q: Deci legatura la nivel central s a tinut cu doamna Calugaru?

PAGE 180

180 A.V.: Da, dansa stiu ca este inspectorul responsabil de aceast a zona curriculara la nivel de minister si tine in permanent legatura cu colegii inspectori pe domeniul respectiv. Cel putin de doua ori pe an sunt intalniri cu ministerul si punem la punct toate programele care le avem sau corectam derapaje. Q: Am intele s. La traininguri participa si inspectorii si profesorii din scoli? A.V.: Daca au participat cand s au facut? A fost cu dedicatie catre profesori. Prima data a fost format inspectorul repectiv colegul meu, care nu mai este in functie si inca vreo cativ a consilieri educativi care colaborau cu domnii inspectori, iar ulterior acestia au format mai departe colegii lor; pentru ca pana la urma profesorii diriginti aplica la clasa. Q: Deci e cumva un training in lant. A.V.: Da, da. Inspectorii au un grup de lu cru, consiliu consultativ ii spunem noi, format din cadre didactice reprezentative. Aceia au fost instruiti si apoi mai departe, la randul lor, au facut instruire in scoli. Si oricum acest program, educatie pentru sanatate, in care intra si acest modul, es te in continuare abordabil in sensul in care noi avem casa corpului didactic, adica fiecare judet care are o astfel de casa a corpului didactic in care se ofera cursuri. Deci orice cadru didactic poate sa mearga sa se formeze in zona respectiva. Sunt cursu ri pe diferite domenii, si Educatie pentru Sanatate este un curs acreditat si pana la acest moment foarte multe cadre didactice au beneficiat de acest curs; pentru ca multe din ele sunt diriginti, si fiind diriginti au obligatia sa dezvolte acest ghid, sa l aplice la clase, si atunci sigur ca nemaiexistand cursuri in cadrul programului, ei se duc la casa corpului didactic, iau numarul de ore si se formeaza. E si cumva cu titlu de obligativitate, exista si un control, deci ei trebuie sa treaca prin aceasta f ormare. Q: Am inteles. E cumva la alegerea lor sa se duca la aceste cursuri? A.V.: Da, da, ei pot sa si aleaga orice cursuri doresc, pentru ca li se ofera mai multe optiuni in casa corpului didactic, dar in general ei isi iau si acest curs Educatie pent ru Sanatate pentru ca doresc sa devina diriginti de clase. Si financiar sunt remunerati mai bine, colaboreaza mai bine cu clasa, intalnindu se mai des pe langa disciplina pe care o predau. Deci multi doresc sa devina diriginti, si atunci trebuie sa parcu rga acest curs. Deci, vrand, nevrand, cei care vor sa fie diriginti se duc si fac cursul. Q: Am inteles. Puteti sa mi dati cateva exemple de activitati specifice din cadrul programului? Ce se face la clasa? A.V.: Sincera sa fiu, nu stiu sa va spun exact. .. ma rog, se face igiena corpului, nu stiu exact; sunt mai multe module, dar stiu ca si ceva pe partea

PAGE 181

181 de atentionare impotriva drogurilor, despre zona de sex / sexualitate, cuprind zona adolescentina, cu problemele ei. Deci e vasta programa, dar sincer e u nu stiu pentru ca nu am aplicat o, neavand sansa sa fiu diriginta in ultimii ani, pentru ca numai din 2007 se implementeaza programul. Eu imi aduc aminte cand eram diriginta in 1999 aplicam tot un program asemanator al unei fundatii, Tineri pentru Tineri care era tot pe zona educatie pentru sanatate si aborda in prima faza comunicarea si apoi bolile cu tenta sexuala, prevenire; si de acolo cred ca s au inspirat. Era un manual foarte interesant, imi aduc aminte ca am fost formati in cadrul unei fundatii s i stiu ca din Statele Unite venise initial programul. Deci abordeaza probleme stringente ale adolescentilor: despre fumat, despre obiceiuri, ma rog... Q: Credeti ca puteti sa mi spuneti cum s a simtit nivelul de implicare si interes al organizatorilor aces tui program? Au fost ei constanti in trimiterea materialelor? Ati simtit ca exista un suport la nivel de teritoriu astfel incat sa intalneasca nevoile profesorilor si ale elevilor? A.V.: Da, in general se primesc tot timpul materiale de la minister, inclu siv acest ghid care mi se pare usor de utilizat pentru ca are si fisa de lucru; mi se pare binevenit. Acum, in perioada asta, sau in ultimii ani, daca au primit ceva manuale sau alte elemente de informare, nu stiu sa va spun pe zona asta, dar colega mea pr imeste in permanenta materiale informative pe zona extracurriculara si probabil si pe zona educatie pentru sanatate. Am avut si tot felul de campanii: nu drogurilor, nu fumatului, alimentatie sanatoasa; constant avem campanii de genul acesta in care inspec toratul este implicat si apoi disemineaza informatie, transmite tot ce este de transmis, inclusiv materialele pe care le primim de la minister. Q: Ce mi puteti spune despre rezultatele acestui program? Despre impactul asupra elevilor? Ce feedback aveti de la ei? Exista evaluari? A.V.: Da, clar ca sunt mult mai bine informati. Generatiile astea avand la dispozitie atat de multa informatie pe zona aceasta, sigur ca stiu de ce sa se fereasca. Acum problemele sunt ca peste tot: mediul ii influenteaza si altele Dar in general elevii sunt deschisi la astfel de programe si stiu ca anul trecut faceau si actiuni de voluntariat; elevi mai mari, de liceu, mergeau la cei mai micuti si i instruiau. Q: Pe temele programului? A.V.: Da, da, si acesta si altele de gen. Q: Exista si evaluari pe care le faceti periodic cu elevii pe aceste programe educationale? A.V.: Nu. Va referiti la evaluari cu note sau ceva de genul asta?

PAGE 182

182 Q: Nu neaparat. Ma refer la cum le foloseste lor. De exemplu, si au imbunatatit notele la invatatura? Notele la purtare? Ceva rezultate legate de eficienta programului. A.V.: Da, da, noi ca inspectorat facem aceste inspectii tematice si atingem si zona de educational si extracurricular. Noi discutam cu elevii si le dam chestionare, avem niste chestionare speciale in care atingem si acest domeniu al consilierii. Si se prelucreaza si se scriu rezultatele intr un raport. Q: Aceste rapoarte... ma intereseaza pe zona de dirigentie, daca exista vreo cifra, un procent, orice indicator legat de feedback ul elevilo r. A.V.: Daca intrati pe site ul nostru si cautati raportul 2009 2010. Noi in fiecare an, la inceput de an scolar punem rapoarte pe site. In raportul cel mare sunt cuprinse toate domeniile, inclusiv ceea ce povestim noi pe zona extracurriculara, si acolo p robabil ca gasiti si niste date statistice. Dar daca nu gasiti ce va trebuie, eu pot incerca sa vorbesc concret cu colega mea. In depth interview, February 22, 2011 D e cat timp sunteti implicata? D.S.: Am fost unul din autorii ghidului pentru profesori. Am fost implicta din 2006. Q: Organizatorii acestui program Ministerul Educatiei, Philip Morris Romania, British American Tobacco Romania si Fundatia pentru Plurali sm si au mai schimbat reprezentantii in parteneriat? A schimbat acest fapt dinamica parteneriatului, sau relatia dumneavoastra cu membrii? D.S.: Nu, nu am colaborat foarte bine indiferent de cine a fost vorba. Organizarea a fost destul de buna si n a fo st nicio problema. Q: Ati intrat in contact cu toti partenerii? Sau ati avut legaturi doar cu unii membri? D.S.: Am avut contact permanent cu doamna Liiceanu, cu doamna Calugaru de la minister, cu reprezentatul de la Philip Morris si o persoana de la Funda tia pentru Pluralism. Q3: Ce rol au avut beneficiarii acestui program copiii, parintii si profesorii in crearea si implementarea programului? De exemplu, care a fost contributia lor in crearea materialelor educative de care v ati ocupat dumneavoastra? Au fost consultati? D.S.: Am redactat ghidul, ghidul a fost apoi plasat in scoli si a fost folosit de diriginti la disciplina optionala sau la orele de dirigentie cand au lucrat si cu

PAGE 183

183 parintii, nu numai cu elevii; pentru ca daca ati vazut ghidul, el are fise de lucru speciale pentru lucrul cu parintii, in depistarea unor dependente. Q: Parintii participa la orele de dirigentie? D.S.: Nu, doar la ore speciale, sunt invitati speciali, fie in cadrul orelor, fie in afara orelor. Activitatea de dirigentie inc lude si intalniri periodice cu parintii. Q: Deci scolile si dirigintii au avut o anumita libertate de implementare a acestui program? D.S.: Da, ghidul a fost un punct de plecare. Sigur ca dansii au avut o libertate in aplicarea programului; insa ghidul a fost orientativ, le a dat o orientare. Q: Inainte sa scrieti acest ghid impreuna cu Doamna Liiceanu, s a facut o cercetare sa aflati nevoile profesorilor? Sau au avut ei si elevii o contributie la crearea materialului sau doar s a implementat pe ei? D.S.: Profesorii si elevii nu au avut nicio contributie in crearea materialului, insa noi ne am bazat in crearea acestui material pe statistici care au aparut in Romania, mai ales in ceea ce priveste dependenta la elevi, comportamentul edictiv in general; deci p e statistici, pe discutii pe care le am avut noi in scoli cu prilejul altor cercetari de exemplu cand am lucrat la Violenta in Scoala, am atins si acest punct si am folosit toate aceste lucruri la redactarea materialului. Q: Am inteles. Stiu ca s au fa cut mai multe traininguri cu profesorii si consilierii scolari. In aceste traininguri discutiile pe care le ati avut despre ghid, au modificat ele cumva materiale ulterioare ale programului? Sau au fost discutii, fara sa se faca modificari in material? D.S .: La cele la care am participat eu, au fost discutii pornind de la ghid si sigur ca s a tinut seama de unele propuneri ale profesorilor si ale elevilor atunci cand s a lucrat pe site ul interactiv realizat pe baza ghidului. Exista un site, www.viatamaeaunjocserios.ro care a avut la baza si niste sugestii ale beneficiarilor. Q: Dumneavoastra ati participat la un numar limitat de traininguri? D.S.: Da, nu am fost la toate, asta a fost stabilit si in functi e de timpul liber al fiecaruia, nu? Q: Imi puteti da cateva exemple de activitati care au loc la aceste trainiguri? D.S.: Sunt discutii pronind de la ghid, si atunci profesorii discuta din experienta lor ce comportamente adictive sunt mai prezente la acea sta varsta, cum s a dezvoltat acest aspect in ultimii ani, amploarea

PAGE 184

184 fenomenului, mai alles dependenta de droguri, noile dependente consumerismul, s.a.m.d. Q: Si in functie de experientele lor, li se sugereaza solutii de catre dumneavoastra, doamnele psi hologi? D.S.: Noi nu dam solutii, noi prezentam unele lucruri si le discutam impreuna cu profesorii. De multe ori ajungem la un punct de vedere comun, dar noi nu impunem niciodata o solutie. Sugeram cai de abordare, pentru ca problemele depind foarte mult de context, de persoanele implicate, deci nu exista o solutie standard pentru toata lumea. Q: Trainingurile inca se desfasoara si acum? D.S.: Dupa ce s a lansat ghidul au fost mai intense, iar acum in perioada asta ne am concentrat pe intalniri cu profes orii si consilierii educativi; am avut acum cateva luni la la Tulcea o intalnire cu 40 de inspectori educativi, deci din toate judetele, si stiu ca activitatea acum e mai concentrata pe site. Q: Ca sa ma asigur: la traininguri participa inspectori de speci alitate, consilieri scolari si, cateodata, elevi? D.S.: Eu nu am avut consilieri, dar stiu ca doamna Liiceanu a participat la un training cu consilieri. Elevi nu participa. Q: Va voi intreba in continuare despre parteneriatul in sine si interactiunea dumne avoastra cu partenerii. Cum ati putea descrie implicarea lor in program? Ma refer la toti partenerii. D.S.: Mie mi s a parut ca implicarea a fost... cum sa spun eu, mi s a parut ca a fost foarte bine organizata toata actiunea; implicarea a fost totala, to ata lumea a stiut foarte bine ce a avut de facut, si a facut in timp util, si din cauza asta si relationarea noastra a fost foarte buna. Fiecare am avut bucatica noastra si la deadline ne intalneam si discutam ce am avut de facut, ce am rezolvat, si ce mai e de facut. Deci toate lucrurile astea le am discutat si nu, nu au fost intarzieri, noi ne am inteles foarte bine. Q: Cu toti partenerii? D.S.: Da, cu toti partenerii, nu am niciun fel de repros. Q: Ati mentionat ceva despre stabilirea deadline urilor. Ci ne a stabilit deadline urile? Cum s a facut gestionarea timpului? D.S.: Deci la inceput noi ne am intalnit si am stabilit un program; bineinteles ca fiecare sectiune a avut un deadline; iar cel care conducea proiectul superviza aceste deadline uri si avut grija ca ele sa fie respectate.

PAGE 185

185 Q: Cine a fost acest coordonator, sau supervizor? D.S.: Pai una din organizatiile astea... nu mai stiu cum ii zice. Acuma sa stiti ca povestea asta e un pic cam multisor pentru mine, pentru ca a trecut ceva timp si multe pr oiecte de atunci. Q: Stiu ca singura organizatie implicata din exterior a fost IMAGE.. D.S.: Da, da, Image Promotion, ei s au ocupat. Q: Deci ei au stabilit deadline urile si au avut grija sa fie respectate? D.S.: Da, da. Chiar la sediul lor ne am si intal nit. Q: Va referiti la inceput, inainte de lansarea oficiala a programului? D.S.: Da, si ne am mai intalnit si pe parcurs. Q: Ati spus ca coordonatorul acestui program a fost IMAGE. Ei au avut grija de deadline uri, sa aduca pe toata lumea in jurul mesei.. D.S.: ..da, da, si de conferintele de presa atunci cand a fost gata ghidul; pentru ca la lansare s a facut o conferinta de presa la care a participat si ministrul de atunci al invatamantului. Q: Am inteles. Cine a fost purtatorul sau purtatorii de cuvant ai programului? D.S.: Fundatia pentru Pluralism si reprezentantul ministerului. Q: Pe cine ati considera dumneavoastra lider al acestui parteneriat? D.S.: In primul rand, dupa mine, liderul a fost doamna Liiceanu, si cu o contributie semnificativa a doa mnei Calugaru de la minister. Q: Cand va referiti la doamna Liiceanu ca lider, ce contributii specifice a avut dumneaei in aceasta calitate? D.S.: Mie mi s a parut ca desi organizarea apartinea IMAGE, totusi a fost impulsionata de dumneaei si s a implicat la diversele niveluri, a fost consultata tot timpul programului la diverse niveluri si s a tinut seama de parerea dumneaei. Q: Au exitat bariere de comunicare intre parteneri de a lungul timpului? Si daca da, cum au fost ele depasite? D.S.: Nu, eu nu am a vut nicio bariera de comunicare. V am spus, eu implicandu ma mai mult in redactarea ghidului si in intalnirile cu profesorii,

PAGE 186

186 nu am intalbit bariere de comunicare cu partenerii. Nu stiu bucataria proiectului propriu zis. Q: Sigur, ne referim doar la experi enta dumneavoastra si la intercatiunea dumneavoastra cu partenerii. Au fost la un moment dat dezechilibre de putere, sa se impuna o anumita opinie sau actiune? D.S.: Nu, nici pomeneala. In general punctul nostru de vedere a fost respectat, si chiar daca au fost sugestii din partea celorlalti, le am discutat si am ajuns la un punct comun, pentru ca am tinut si noi mereu seama de sugestiile lor. Insa, in principal, punctul nostru de vedere a fost respectat. Q: Cum ati fost implicata dumneavoastra in parteneri at? Cine v a propus? D.S.: Eu am fost recomandata de doamna Liiceanu. Q: Am vorbit de implicarea partenerilor pe diverse niveluri. Dar dedicarea lor? Au fost diferente la nivel de dedicare? D.S.: Din ce am observat eu, nu mi s a parut sa fie diferente de implicare, pentru ca fiecare stia foarte bine ce are de facut. Asta a fost observatia mea putin din afara. Q: Cum a fost gestionata comunicarea, din cate ati observat dumneavoastra? Cine a fost responsabil de organizarea si gestionarea comunicarii? D.S.: Intalnirile pe care le aveam noi se desfasurau la IMAGE, de acolo era numita o persoana care era in contact permanent cu noi, si de la Philip Morris la fel, si eu cu doamna Liiceanu si doamna Calugaru am fost in contact permanent, v am spus, telefoane, e m ailuri, intalniri. Q: Cum ati descrie dumneavoastra instrumentele de comunicare? Au fost ele mai mult directe, de exemplu intalniri, sau mai mult indirecte, ca telefoane, e mailuri? Cum au evoluat ele? D.S.: Nu pot sa mi dau seama daca au fost mai mult d e un fel sau de altul, dar au fost destul de multe si face to face, intalniri acasa la doamna Liiceanu, la mine, la doamna Calugaru, intalniri la sediul IMAGE, multe comunicari pe mail... nu pot sa spun ca au fost mai mult de un fel. Sigur ca cea mai rapid a forma de comunicare a fost pe mail; in caz de urgenta, se rezolva asa. Q: Deci sa spunem pe chestiuni punctuale? D.S.: Exact. Q: Si acestea au ramas constante de a lungul anilor, din 2007 si pana astazi?

PAGE 187

187 D.S.: Da, au ramas constante. Continuam sa colabor am si pentru alte proiecte in aceeasi echipa, pentru ca a mers foarte bine colaborarea, si atunci am mers mai departe pe aceeasi echipa. Q: Va referiti la dumneavoastra, doamna Liiceanu, si doamna Calugaru? D.S.: Da, da. Q: Imi puteti da un exemplu de alt proiect? D.S.: Da, proiectul Educatie pentru Sanatate, Partea a II a. Programul a inceput acum 10 ani, dar eu am fost implicata doar in partea a doua. Q: Am inteles. Am vorbit la un inspectorat scolar in teritoriu si ei abordau acesta practica curenta? D.S.: Tine de fiecare scoala cum isi plaseaza si cum isi combina programele... mai ales ca ele se suprapun oarecum; pentru ca un stil de viata nesanatos include dependentele, care pot fi analizate. Q: Mi ati spus ca intalnirile intre dumneavoastra si partenerii din cadrul a lungul timpului. Daca e sa ne referim la ultimul an, de cate ori v ati intalnit? D.S.: Daca va referiti la ONG urile respective eu nu am mai avut contact cu ei, insa cu colaboratoarele mele, ma intalnesc destul de des, de cateva ori pe luna. D.S.: In general pe programe si pe alte lucruri, nu numai... Cu ele este o r elatie profesionala care s a prelungit in timp. D.S.: Nu, eu nu am mai participat. Q: Ce rezultate a avut acest program la nivel social? D.S.: Daca veti intreba in scoli, programul este cunoscu t. Au fost primite ghidurile in scoli. Asta este un raspuns privind impactul programului. Si chiar si elevii... am discutat cu un nepot de al meu despre acest lucru si mi a spus ca ei la scoala au lucrat dupa acest ghid; s a discutat la orele de dirigentie Multe scoli au inclus acest program in categoria optionalelor. Aceasta se stabileste cu comitetul de parinti, si foarte multi parinti au preferat la

PAGE 188

188 optionale alte lucruri de discutat. Dar sunt si multe s coli unde s a inclus, fie la dirigentie, fie ca materie optionala. Q: Ultima intrebare: daca este sa faceti o lista cu cei mai importanti factori care au contribuit la succesul acestui parteneriat, care ar fi ea? D.S.: Dupa mine, buna organizare, excelent a comunicare, si cred ca un cuvant greu de spus l a avut faptul ca ministerul s a implicat mult in programul acesta. Q: Cand spuneti ca s a implicat mult, la ce va referiti mai exact? D.S.: Nu numai la coordonarea ghidului, ci si la implementarea programul ui in scoli. Deci a sustinut prin discutii directe cu profesorii din scoli, cu inspectorii, ceea ce e un semnal ca ministerul a crezut in seriozitatea acestui proiect si s a implicat. In depth interview, February 23, 2011 Q: De cand exista programul in sc oala pe care o reprezentati si unde este el incadrat? F.A.: Din 2006 mi se pare ca exista in scoala. Exact nu stiu anul in care a debutat in scoala noastra, dar cunosc in ultimii doi ani cam care ar fi activitatile derulate in cadrul acestui program. Q: N activitatea extra curriculare? La orele de dirigentie? In ce cadru se aplica mai exact? F.A.: In ambele situatii. Exista activitati propuse pentru orele de dirigentie care se tin intr o anumita data in toata scoala; intr o saptamana in care se tin orele de dirigentie, este specificata tema pentru ora respectiva. De asemenea, exista proiecte care au in vedere acest aspect de viata si joc, astfel incat se axeaza pe problematica drogurilo r, a traficului de persoane. Proiectele poarta titluri diferite. Q: Aceste proiecte sunt periodice? F.A.: Proiectele au minimum patru activitati. De exemplu, un astfel de a centrat pe ideea traficului de persoa ne, rolul femeii in societate, modalitati prin care sa se combata sarcina nedorita la varste fragede, campanii de informare si constientizare privind aceste sarcini care din ce in ce mai mult apar in randul elevilor de liceu. Au fost si dramatizari tematic e vizand acest aspect al traficului de persoane, lectorate cu parintii si politia; toate in cadrul proiectului respectiv. Q: Am inteles. Cand spuneti dramatizari, va referiti la teatru?

PAGE 189

189 F.A.: Da. S au luat situatii concrete pe care le am prezentat sub form a dramatizata ca si o modalitate de a sensibiliza in alt fel, si de a transmite intr un mod artistic mesajul. Q: Verific un pic daca am inteles procedura in orle de dirigentie. Se fac aceleasi activitati in toata scoala intr o ora de dirigentie? F.A.: Deci se propune ca o data pe semestru in saptamana 10, de exemplu, toate orele de dirigentie sa se axeze pe aceasta tema. Se da un model cu activitati si aspecte pe care le pot aborda, si fiecare isi personalizeaza ora de dirigentie urmarind, sau pornind de la acele aspecte sugerate. Q: Ce rol aveti dumneavoastra in implementarea acestui program, in calitate de consilier scolar? F.A.: Personal, anul acesta coordonez un proiect care vizeaza iar un aspect de viata, si l e deruleaza la nivel judetean, avem opt parteneri in proiect. Am surprins tipuri de violenta pe care le intalnim: violenta in media, violenta domestica, violenta in scoala, in grupul de prieteni, violenta in limbaj, si pe baza acestor tipuri de violenta am incropit un material care surprinde secvente filmate, secvente in care elevii sunt protagonisti si prezinta situatii concrete; un aspect teoretic, dupa fiecare din aceste secvente; iar acest material l am conceput sub forma unei activitati cu scenariu, ia r la finalul ei, generam un cod al non violentei in 10 reguli, si elevii grupati prezinta aceste reguli care prezinta codul non violentei, pornind de la situatiile concrete prezentate. Si acesta este un model de activitate cu care ne prezentam in diferite scoli care ne sunt partenere; alaturi de materialul nostru, avem parteneri politia, care are un material specific pe care il prezinta si deocamdata suntem in perioada in care implementam proiectul in aceste scoli partenere ca in luna mai sa avem o reuniune a tuturor participantilor la acest proiect in care sa definim bannere, diferite sign post uri; si in 15 mai avem un mars as non violentei. Q: Am inteles ca implementati acest program in mai multe scoli. Cum functioneaza asta mai exact? Dumneavoastra apart ineti de Liceul Gh. Sincai, nu? F.A.: Da, avem in proiect parteneri din fiecare scoala; avem un profesor care se ocupa de selectarea grupului tinta, elevii care au probleme de comportament, deci de violenta, si un grup de pilotaj identificam in fiecare s coala vreo patru elevi care, voluntar, sa participe la organizarea activitatii in scoala respectiva. Si acesti voluntari care ne ajuta in fiecare scoala plus profesorul care ii coordoneaza sunt cei care participa in momentul acela in care avem un team work sa confectionam banner e si sign post uri; si ei vor fi organizatorii pentru momentul marsului.

PAGE 190

190 Q: Deci dumneavoastra, ca si consilier, sunteti responsabila de conceperea acestor programe? F.A.: Da, eu l am conceput. Q: Si parteneriatele se schimba? F.A.: Am definit inca de la inceput in proiect opt parteneri: pe langa politie, mai avem centrul judetean se asistenta psihologica ei ne au furnizat ceva materiale si am definit proiectul ca un proiect educational si atunci promovam activitati educationale care ar putea sa se desfasoare in scoala si cu alte ocazii, sau sa fie model pentru orele de dirigentie, insa il pilotam in scoli din judet, nu numai in oras. Q: Deci chiar daca dumneavoastra apartineti de scoala, proiectele pe care le propuneti pot fi imp lementate in diverse scoli din judet? F.A.: Da, este un proiect judetean. Q: Activitatile pe care le propuneti sunt diferite in fiecare an? De exemplu anul trecut ne am axat pe tra ficul de persoane si am mai avut un alt proiect pe care l am lansat impreuna cu Corpul Pacii, de combatere a absenteismului si totodata am luptat sa nu mai fie exploatati prin munca elevii din mediul rural. Si acest proiect s a axat pe munca cu grupurile d e elevi rromi, pentru ca acolo se intampla foarte multe situatii de abandon, si tot acestia merg sa munceasca cu ziua. Q: Pentru ca ati vorbit de mai multe materiale pe care le incorporati in aceste programe, ghid practic. Il aveti, va ajuta ca idee, ca punct de pornire? F.A.: Il avem, dar eu sincer nu l folosesc. Noi aici in scoala suntem cativa dintre noi formati ca animatori socio educativi si avem propriul nostru manual pe care l am elaborat. In momentul e laborarii l am si testat si am vazut ca functioneaza si preferam sa ne promovam propriile modele de activitati. Manualul l am facut prin participarea la un alt proiect, este un manual national care acopera aria de animatie socio educativa. Q: Dar tematica este asemanatoare cu cea din ghid, numai procedeele sunt diferite? F.A.: Da. Q: Acest program este un parteneriat multi sector intre minister, o fundatie si doua companii de tutun. Cum credeti ca aceasta formula contribuie la invatamantul romanesc?

PAGE 191

191 F.A.: Cred ca este foarte important, din perspectiva accesului la materiale si la finantare. Q: Dumneavoastra raportati inspectoratului? F.A.: Da, semestrial. Q: Inspectoratul va sprijina si in trimiterea de materiale? F.A.: Da, faciliteaza accesul la material e. Probabil ca ministrul si ceilallti parteneri implicati lucreaza direct cu inspectoratul si cei care distribuie in teritorii. Q: Care sunt rezultatele pe care le ati observat dumneavoastra in scoala? Ce beneficii concrete a adus acest program profesorilo r si elevilor? F.A.: In primul rand, a crescut numarul elevilor implicati in activitati de voluntariat si interesati sa participe la tot felul de activitati in proiectele propuse. In ceea ce ma priveste si daca urmarim raportarile, se constata o diminuare a ratei absenteismului, aspectele de violenta in scoala sunt in scadere, sau chiar nu mai exista; iar vizavi de sarcini si trafic de persoane, elevii sunt promotorii acestor programe in grupul de prieteni, si sunt foarte multumiti ca au un rol in afara sc olii. Ei sunt mult mai increzatori si mai bine informati, si le place sa spuna asta de cate ori au ocazia. Q: Exista niste raportari legate de rezultate pe activitatile respective? F.A.: Cel putin in semestru acesta, eu nu am generat o raportare concreta v izavi de aceste rezultate; am generat o raportare vizavi de activitatile derulate. Banuiesc ca analiza rezultatelor se face anual, si eu nu am fost in functia in care sunt acum, sa sa am timp sa generez rezultate. Eu sunt in functie din septembrie. Dar in general, inspectoratul monitorizeaza activitatile si genereaza unn raport la nivel judetean cu ce s a implementat. Ca rezultate, va mai pot spune ca a crescut numarul profesorilor interesati de formare continua si, in general, de formari din cadrul proiect ului Commenius; si a crescut in general numarul persoanelor implicate in aceste proiecte. Eu am fost solicitata saptamana trecuta sa particip intr un proiect national initiat de Asociatia Nationala Antidrog. In depth interview, February 23, 2011 Q: De can implemebtat in Buzau cred ca in anul scolar 2007 2008. El se incadreaza in activitati educative non formale si est e vorba de o interventie intentionata si

PAGE 192

192 intermediata de Ministerul Educatiei, Cercetarii, Tineretului si Sportului. Iar a incadrat in proiectul de prevenire a influentei factorilor de risc, un proiect de asemenea al ministerului educatiei, parteneri, Fundatia pentru Pluralism, fiind ambele proiecte din cadrul unui program a 2003 pana in 2007 deci este vorba de o interventie de 5 ani, de durata metat in Buzau? P.M.: Nu, acesta a fost un proiect mai de mica anvergura, s a desfasurat in interventie mai generalizata. Nici aici nu pot sa va spun daca e vorba de toate judetele di n tara, dar cred ca oricum proiectul s a pilotat in mai putine judete, iar produsele acestui proiect au fost difuzate in toate inspectoratele; exista aceasta procedura prin care proiectele educative se piloteaza mai intai intr un numar relativ restrans de judete si de scoli iar apoi, in baza rezultatelor, se generalizeaza si in general produsele constau in publicatii, in oferte de curriculum care sunt trimise in toate judetele si depinde si de interesul generat initial si de calitatea cadrelor didactice car e se implica, si de nevoile identificate la nivel local si de mai multi factori care pot sa determine implementarea efectiva a unui asemenea produs. Q: Dumneavoastra ca inspector ce rol aveti mai exact in coordonarea programului sau in implementarea lui la nivel teritorial? P.M.: In primul rand, avem rol de multiplicator, de facilitator; dar in prima faza as vrea sa lamuresc urmatoarele: asemenea programe de educatie, nationale, care se realizeaza intr un parteneriat institutional minister si de regula fundatii, de exemplu un partener serios si solicitat este Fundatia Tineri pentru Tineri care a fost foarte activa si in prima parte a programului si in acest program din 2007 deci asemenea interventii sunt aduse la cunostinta tuturor inspectorilor de sp ecialitate pe activitati formale si non formale in cadrul unor consfatuiri nationale; initial sunt convocati inspectorii din judetele carora se intentioneaza pilotarea, se piloteaza pentru un an scolar sau mai putin, iar apoi rezultatele de fac cunoscute i nspectorilor din toate judetele. Apoi se trimit seturi de materiale infromative, de mediatizare pliante, afise, brosuri care se repartizeaza in scoli printr o consfatuire pe care inspectorul o rae in judet cu profesorii coordonatori educativi, adica co ordoneaza activitatile educative non formale la nivelul unitatilor de invatamant. Aceste persoane sunt persoanele de contact ale inspectorilor educativi, carora le livram informatia totodata cu materialele pe care le avem la dispozitie; sau intr o sedinta cu directorii in care le prezentam

PAGE 193

193 oportunitatea de a include scoala pe care o conduc intr un asemenea proiect. Acuma la recomandarea ministerului si in special a inspectoarei care se ocupa la nivel de minister Daniela Calugaru si in functie de politic a proiectului depinde de grupul tinta noi recomandam mai departe programul unui numar definit de scoli, in prima instanta. Depinde de interesele pe care le avem si de posibilitati. Daca este vorba de diseminarea de informatii, ceea ce este primul lucru pe care si l doreste orice tip de proiect, apoi in functie de finantarea si de tipul de materiale, noi avem posibilitatea de a l face cunoscut in toate scolile prin brosuri, pliante, afise. De exemplu, saptamana trecuta am primit pe un proiect similar, europene cu o titulatura mult mai lunga si mai alambicata ca sa raspunda prioritatilor de finantare, am primit niste materiale de foarte buna calitate si suficiente pentru toate scolile, ca re pot fi folosite la orele de dirigentie. Deci, revenind, daca interesul sau scopul proiectului este de a aplica la un numar de clase, atunci noi identificam acele resurse de cadre didactice pregatite care pot sa implementeze proiectul si prin orele pe ca re le au la dispozitie si prin calitatea pregatirii, si le includem intr un proiect pe care apoi il monitorizam si care are un circuit mai concret si mai personalizat, in sensul in care stim exact care sunt profesorii, care sunt scolile si care sunt clasel e. Daca insa este o oferta generala si care depinde de mai multi factori pentru a fi asumata, in sensul ca fie e vorba de un curs optional care este adus la cunostinta elevilor si parintilor alaturi de alte optionale dintr un pachet, poate fi solicitat sau nu; noi nu mai avem asa un control foarte strict. Si nu putem face decat sa fim noi convinsi ca am diseminat informatia, ca ea a ajuns la toata lumea de asta am folosit blogul de trei patru ani, sa i ajut pe colegii mei si sa mi usureze mie comunicarea, fiindca noi inca nu avem niste proceduri foarte precise prin care sa comunicam informatia; telefoanele de pilda sunt pe interioare, n ai acces la telefon direct, sunt multe chestii care intarzie foarte mult informatia; sau depinzi de secretare, asa ca am introdus aceasta procedura, pe care unii o respecta unii nu, depinde si de interesul pe care il au cadrele didactice, directorii, de a fi consultat site ul inspectoratului si blogul zilnic, ca sa se afle solicitarile si noutatile. Daca mie mi se solicita, prin natura proiectului, sa am un contact direct cu un numar de colegi de ai mei, asta il fac fara discutie, in mod direct. Q: Mi ati povestit de materiale, fie pe awareness, fie pe ultimele campanii pe care le aveti. Exista astfel de materiale noi pentru P.M.: Da, este o brosura de foarte buna de calitate in privinta curriculumului chiar o am in fata deci este o brosura care contine un curriculum care poate fi abordat fie la un curs optional, fie la orele de dirigentie. Eu il numesc ghid, pentru ca un manual presupune niste continuturi care sunt obligatoriu abordate asa cum sunt in manual, sau care se adreseaza in sfarsit elevilor intr un fel formal. Un ghid iti ofera informatie si modalitatea

PAGE 194

194 de abordare a informatiei, si lasa la latitudinea educatorului chestiunile legate de metodologie sau adaugarea unui alt continut. Acuma, noi am primit in judete un numar de cate unitati scolare pentru fiecare cate unul sau doua care in mod obligatoriu intra in biblioteca scolara, si pot fi folosite de diriginti. Eu am primit un numar mai mare si exista in fiecare scoala cate trei, patru, cinci asemenea ghiduri disponibile spre consultare. Alte documente suplimentare nu, pentru ca este un curriculum care se refera strict la factorii de risc, la sexualitate care este o problematica mai putin abordata sau preferata in orele educative, fiindca exista inca o pudoare sau poate chiar un fel de nepricepere a cadrelor didactice, care fie considera ca abordand ace asta tematica isi pierd oarecum din autoritate si aluneca intr o zona in care sunt mai multe tensiuni cand se discuta, fie pentru ca efectiv nu se pricep, fiind mai in varsta decat elevii, uneori trecuti de 40 50 de ani, nu au usurinta de a aborda in mod l ejer aceasta problematica; si atunci exista fel de fel de interventii pe care noi le facem spre a le simplifica modalitatea de abordare; vorbim aici si de voluntari, de Fundatia Tineri pentru Tineri care formeaza si a format in toate regiunile tarii volunt ari si face cursuri iar ei pot fi solicitati pentro orele astea educative. Ei care sunt tineri si au si calitati de animator, de facilitator, deci asta e o zona de discutie care ca si tip de componenta a educatiei pentru sanatate a existat si in programu l mare cu acelasi nume care are un ghid foarte cuprinzator, cu tot ceea ce viseaza educatia pentru sanatate in zona generata asta este parerea mea personalla si de prezenta in g rupul de experti ai ministerului ssi ai acestui program a doamnei Aurora Liiceanu, care este un psiholog... un vector de opinie, fiindca are si aparitii foarte frecvente in media; si doctorul Cristian Andrei, care este iarasi o aparitie extrem de des intal nita in media, si care sunt niste alegeri fericite ca tip de experti, fiindca prin rezonanta numelui, trezesc cumva interesul. Si este un continut extrem de placut realizat, accesibil. Q: Pentru ca la momentul actual exista o multitudine de programe aseman atoare celelalte? P.M.: Diferenta este, ce sa spun, acuma noi am avut si avem in continuare acesti experti despre care am vorbit si ale caror contributii se gasesc in div erse materiale care sunt ca produse prezente in orice program de avengura asta si finantate atat de puternic. Va spuneam ca am primit spatamana trecuta produsele alea pentru programul care se desfasoara acum pana in 2013; iar diferenta a fi, in astea pe ca re le am primit, o tematica abordata, complex in sensul de daca un cadru didactic doreste sa implementeze programul asta ca un curs optional, ii este foarte util acest ghid ca atare, cu foarte putine adaugiri; pentru ca daca e o ora pe saptamana mare lucru in plus n ai timp sa faci, si atuncea ghidul este destul de bine structurat si suficient. Cele primite recent sunt foarte esentializate,

PAGE 195

195 ele sunt niste pliante bine facute, intercative cu vizualuri moderne, dar continutul este redus si concentrat. Deci diferenta este ca ai citit pliantul respectiv in cinci 10 minute si te ai lamurit despre ce e vorba, ai un moment de reflectie si eventual ai ocazia sa abordezi subiectul la o ora si ca m atat. fie in cadrul orelor de dirigentie, sau al activitatilor extrascolare? P.M.: Sigur. In primul rand, acest ghid este solicitat la dirigentie, da r intr un fel conjuctural; depinde de tematica orei respective, si atunci e un auxialiar pe care il foloseste profesorul diriginte atunci cand abordeaza o tema legata de sex si sexualitate, fumat, de alcool, de droguri, dependente si alte obiceiuri noi car e genereaza adictii, cum ar fi calculatorul. Este o abordare la indemana dirigintelui. Acest auxiliar este recomandat claselor de gimnaziu, deci varstele 12 15 ani, dar eu l am recomandat si oferit si liceelor, abordarea este una inteligenta si nu e depasi ta pentru nivelul de intelegere a adolescentilor din liceu. Cel mai bine si recomandat aa fost pentru aceste ore educative. In afara acestor ore formale de dirigentie, exista activitati de educatie nonformale, stabilite fie la nivel de clasa, fie la nivel de scoala, care se axeaza pe o tematica specifica; si in ultimii doi trei in sensul ca numarul si frecventa acestor activitati a fost extrem de mare pe prevenirea consumului de substante toxice, de droguri. Cea mai de actualitate problema in ultimul an a fost consumul de substante etnobotanice. Si iata ca atunci cand un profesor vrea sa realizeze... deci au fost si sunt in continuare, se dezvolta in judete asemenea proiecte in parteneriat cu centre de evaluare si consi liere uite ca acuma in scapa exact.. se numesc CPECA, deci centre de prevenire, evaluare si consiliere antidrog. Asa se cheama aceste centre care functioneaza la nivel judetean si ele dezvolta aceste programe in scoli in parteneriate si cu acordul insp ectoratului scolar. Si atunci profesorii implicati in asemenea proiecte pot sa utilizeze aceste auxiliare. Q: In cadrul proiectelor astora, ce fel de activitati se fac? P.M.: Exista o varietate acceptabila de activitati, in sensul ca cele mai frecvente su nt concursuri care vizeaza creativitatea pe o tema data; sunt concursuri de creatie pe arte vizuale, concursuri pe care le am incurajat foarte mult de arte participative. Eu am incurajat concursurile de jocuri teatrale, adica performance pe o tema data cum este asta a consumului de droguri. Am incurajat insa o abordare cumva pozitiva in sensul ca am preluat evident din teorii mai moderne de preventie a factorilor de risc care sustin ideea ca o formulare sub termeni de negatie NU consumati, NU faceti, NU e bine e mai putin acceptata si ca ar trebui sa gasim alte tipuri de abordari, in general pozitive, adica sa se propuna in discursul sau in actiunea respectiva o activitate alternativa; de pilda imi place sa fac sport si asta ma tine departe de ten tatii periculoase; si asa pornesti de la o

PAGE 196

196 afirmatie. Deci o data, sunt folosite frecvent concursurile. Dar am mai avut si formare de voluntari in ideea de a i folosi in zona de peer education. S au facut, la nivelul inspectoratului,... numarul proiectelor cu acest centru de prevenire a crescut foarte mult, cel putin in ultimul an, este o colaborare pentru ca la noi asta e riscul din lipsa timpului, se manifesta si o doza de formalism In plus, am facut si programe adresate parintilor; si aici noi suntem la fel de bine pregatiti ca in alte parti in privinta relatiei cu parintii. Noi ne am dat seama ca am pierdut din vedere acest partener pretios familia in ultimii doi trei ani, can d am vazut ca familiile tinere nu mai au valoarea parintelui pentru copil, in sensul valorii familiei ca structura si parinti responsabilizati. Noi ne am confruntat cu migratia masiva parinti migrati care si au parasit copiii, intr o forma sau alta ca i au lasta la bunici, la rude, sau abandonati la voia intamplarii. Si atunci ne am dat seama ca de fapt lipseste acest tip de educatie care trebuie livrata parintilor in paralel, pentru ca orice mesaj venit din partea scolii sa fie intretinut si in familie Pentru ca indiferent ce se intampla, scoala este un mediu contrafactual, in care ceea ce se invata e la limita idealului, la limita a ceea ce ar trebui sa fie dar nu este realitatea. Si atunci cand copilul iese de pe usa scolii, da de realitate. Si cand intra in casa, da tot de realitate, o alata, care nu se potriveste cu mesajul educativ pe care l a primit in ziua respectiva, fie ca e vorba de dirigentie, sau orice alta activitate in scoala. Deci exista si asemenea intentii acum de a face o scoala a pari ntilor cu programe speciale, care se adreseaza parintilor cu copii foarte mici, pentru ca ei sunt mai tineri si mai receptivi legat de ce ar trebui sa faca pentru copilul lor, si la faptul de a si asuma responsabilitatea sa pastreze mesajul nealteral. Pent ru ca de cele mai multe ori se intampla ca parintii sa plamani innegriti si moartea cu ochii, si el vine acasa si tata su fumeaza ca turcu, n are ce sa se prinda de el ca mesaj, decat faptul ca e o chestie artificiala, si au facut si aia datoria, dar de fapt nu i asa de rau. P.M.: Da, am avut nevoie de a descrie intr un fel impactul si de a implementa aceasta parte de activitate si atunci o modalitate prin care am reusit sa... de monitorizare nu s a pus problema ca intr un proiect care urmarea impactul intr o interventie pilot ata, pentru ca in ce ne priveste, noi am implementat, deci am preluat experienta de la cei care ne au prezentat o si am folosit documentele, materialele realizate, respectiv aceste g hiduri, care pentru profesori au inclus si o mapa cu o fisa pe care au folosit o de utilizare, o fisa pentru parinti, un chestionar, s.a.m.d. Deci niste documente pe care noi le am oferit in scoli. De monitorizat, prin urmare, nu am realizat o monitorizare in sensul de a avea o evidenta a claselor unde se foloseste acest auxialiar, si sa mi propun un program in care sa merg in asistenta si

PAGE 197

197 in care sa discut cu profesorii si cu elevii. Asta si pentru ca am primit aceste materiale dupa ce a inceput anul scola r si nu intr un interval in care se face planul de scolarizare si nu intr un interval in care scolile isi pot propune prin profesori pachetele de optionale, deci sa fi propus sa faca un curs optional a nici un profesor nu si o contruit o ora de optional folosint acest curriculum, insa am administrat chestionare anul trecut si am solicitat in paralel mai intai prin coordonatorii educativi, in jur de 250 sunt la scoli gimnaziale care au si scoli anexa fara personalitate juridicai 30 de licee. Am socilitat o situatie prin care sa reiasa existenta auxiliarului la biblioteca, utilizarea, frecventa, la ce tip de teme este folosit, in ce activitati (daca in orele de dirigentie, in activitatile extrascolare s au in intalniri cu parintii). In final, am realizat faptul ca este prezent in scolile gimnaziale intr o proportie de 70%; din evidenta mea, trebuia sa fie in toate scolile, dar probabil fiindca nu a fost folosit niciodata intr un numar de scoli, procentaju l a fost mai mic de 100%. Intr o proportie ceva mai mica e utilizat la orele de dirigentie. Acum, materiale exista si sunt puse la dispozitie, numai disponibilitate de a le folosi sa fie. Q: Am vazut ca in sistemul de invatamant romanesc parteneriatele mul ti sector pe programe educationale sunt din ce in ce mai frecvente. Care credeti ca este impactul acestor parteneriate la nivel educational la dumneavoastra in teritoriu? Credeti ca au ajutat in vreun fel educatia? P.M.: Categoric. O data cu stabilirea s istemului democratic, s a stabilit si evidenta faptului ca educatia nu se face numai in scoala si ca exista in afara educatiei formale o zona extrem de eclectica a educatiei nonformale in informale a influentelor care vin din comunitate, din media, din t oate aceste directii cu care individul ia contact. Si atunci s a incercat si se incearca prin acest tip de colaborare, de parteneriat, o coagulare, pana la urma, a interventiilor. Pentru ca aceasta interventie dinspre societatea civila, ea este considerata necesara si benefica pe zone in care nivelul de educatie este precar, si apoi interventiile din zona formala, din zona scolii; si o vreme chiar dupa revolutie erau chiar doua pietre tari care se loveau, pentru ca exista un fel de orgoliu si distanta din p artea societatii civile care pretindea ca procedeaza la tipuri de proiecte educationale pentru ca scoala nu este in stare sa le ofere. Mai precis, educatia sexuala s a incadrat in aceasta conceptie. Si educatorii de ariceau un pic pentru ca isi spuneau ca intentia e buna, dar nu au competente metodologice si didactice. Intre timp lucrurile s au mai limpezit si in zona societatii civile, au rezistat organizatiile puternice si bine intemeiate, cu scopuri autentice, s au mai rarit, si cei care sunt importanti s au dezvoltat si au realizat ca nu pot avea un discurs paralel cu scoala, ca nu are succes cu el. Apoi scoala si a dat seama ca fara o relatie coerenta si utilizand expertiza unor parteneri bine intentionati, fara asta e mult mai sarac mesajul. Sigur ca s prijinul este unul real si benefic deoarece sunt considerente pragmatice, de pilda accesul la grant uri importante e conditionat de o diagnoza care nu poate fi realizata decat de un parteneriat. In plus, ele au o greutate evidenta, si poate asta a fost si

PAGE 198

198 si gasi aceste cai de parteneriat, pentru ca dincolo de aspectul pragmatic, o interventie de felul acesta armonizata asupra elevilor are eficienta mult mai buna si impactul este unul mult ma i mare pentru ca e ceva complementar. Deci orice fel de proiect initiat in acest fel in zona ajuta dezvoltarea armonioasa a personalitatii, pentru ca un copil are nevoie de interventii din toate partile, iar daca ele sunt dirijate in functie de niste nevoi constatate la timp, eficienta este una mai mare. Acuma, e adevarat ca si factorii de risc la care sunt expusi copiii sunt mereu in schimbare si exista intotdeauna ceva nou periculos de care trebuie tinut seama.

PAGE 199

199 LIST OF REFERENCES Agentia Nationala Antid rog (2006). Raport national privind situatia drogurilor Retrieved January 3, 2011, from www.ana.gov Agentia Nationala Antidrog (2006). Raport national privind situatia drogurilor Retrieved January 3, 2011, from www.transindex.ro Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative public management: New strategies for local governments. Washington DC : Georgetown University Press. Agranoff, R. (2007). Managing within networks: Adding value to public organizations Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. Anghel, F., Balica M., Badescu M., Boca I., Brancoveanu, R., Ghinea, D., Hritac, R., Jigau, M., Novak, A., Novak, C., & Pop, V. (1999). Ministry of National Education Institute fo r Sciences of Ed ucation Romania: Education for a ll. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from www.unesco.ro Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2007). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Rese arch and Theory Arya, B. & Salk, J. (2006). Cross sector alliance learning and effectiveness of voluntary codes of corporate socialresponsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly Volume 16(2), 211 234. Arino, A., & de la Torre, J. (1998). Le arning from failure: Towards an evolutionary model Babbie, E. (2010). The practice of social r esearch (Eleventh ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. Blackshaw, T. (2010). Key concepts in co mmunity s tudies Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Bl ockson, L. (2003). Multisector a pproaches to societal issues m anagement. Business & Society 43(2), 381 390. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic i nteractionism. Berkley: University of California Press. Bot an, C. (2006). Grand s trategy, strategy, and tactics in public r elations. In C. Botan., & V. Haz leton (Eds.) Public Relations Theory II New York, NY: Routledge. Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory 7, 14 25.

PAGE 200

200 Bri stow, G., Entwistle, T., Hines F., & Martin, S. (2009). New spaces for i nclusion? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research Journal Compilation, Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd ., pp. 903 921. Broom, G.M. (2009). Effective public relations Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Broom, C., Casey, S., & Ritchey, J. (2000). Toward a concept and theory of organization public relationships: An update. In J.A. Ledingham & S.D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational approach to public relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Cambridge, V. C. (2002). Milestones in communication and national development. In Y. R. Kamalipour (Ed.), Global Comm unication (pp. 141 160). Toronto, Canada: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Cash, D. W., Adger, W., Berkes, F., Garden, P., Lebel, L., Olsson, P., Pritchard, L., & Young, O. (2006). Scale and cross scale dynamics: Governance and information in a multilevel wor ld. Ecology and Society 11(2) online] URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art8/. Coombs, T. (2000). Crisis management. Advantages of a relational perspective. In J.A. Ledingham & S.D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship manageme nt: A relational approach to public relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Crosby, B. & Bryson, J. (2010). Integrative leadership and the creation and maintenance of cross sector collaborations. The Leadership Quarterly, 21, 211 230. Dill, B (2009). The paradoxes of community based p articipation in Dar es Salaam. Development and Change 717 743. Dozier, D. & Broom, G. (2006). The centrality of practitioner roles to pu blic relations theory. In C. Botan & V. Hazleton (Eds.) Public relations t heory II New York, NY: Routledge. e Consiliere (2010, March 22). Decizia e a mea. Retrieved January 2, 2011, from e consiliere.blogspot.com. Ferguson, M. A. (1984, August). Building theory in public relations: Interorganizational relationships Paper p resented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Gainesville, FL. Foldy, E. G., Goldman, L., & Ospina, S. (2008). Sense giving and the role of cognitive shifts in the work of leadership. Leadership Quarterly

PAGE 201

201 Forrer, J., Kee, J., Newcomer, K., & Boyer, E. (2010). Public private p artnerships and t he public accountability q uestion. Public Administration Review May June, 475 484. Frontnews (2009, January 15). Violenta si traficul de droguri in scoli: Noii sefi descopera un fenomen social vechi. Retrieved February 2, 2011, from www.frontnews.ro Gaynor, N. (2010). Transforming participation? The politics of development in Malawi and Ireland Palgrave Macmillan. Gray, B (2000). Assessing inter organizational collaboration: Multiple conceptions and multiple methods. In D. Faulkner & M. de Rond (Eds.), Perspectives on collaboration London: Oxford University Press. Grunig, J. & Huang, Y. H., (2000). From organizational e ffectiveness to relationship indicators: Antecedents of relationships, public relations strategies, and relationship outcomes. In J.A. Ledingham & S.D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational approach to public relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Guillamon (2010, September 1). Innovative p artnerships for in the global partnership a rena. Foreign Policy Retrieved on September 20, 2011, from Factiva Database. Hallahan, K. (2004). practice. Communication Yearbook 28, 233 279. Hardy, C., Lawrence, T. B., & Phillips, N. (2006). Swimming with sharks: Creating strategic change through multi sector collaboration. Internationa l Journal of Strategic Change Management 1, 96 112. Heath, R. G., & Frey, L. R. (2004). Ideal collaboration: A conceptual framework of community collaboration. In P. J. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication yearbook 28 (pp. 189 231). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. He ath, R. (2006). A rhetorical theory approach to issues management. In C. Botan & V. Hazleton (Eds.) Public relations t heory II New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 63 101. Hemphill, L., McGreal, S., Berry, J., & Watson, S. (2006). Leadership, power and multisec tor urban regeneration p artnerships. Urban Studies 43(1), 59 80. Holtzhausen, D. (2000). Postmodern values in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research 12(1), 93 114. Holtzhausen, D., & Voto, R. (2003). Resistance from the margins: The p ostmodern public relations practitioner as organizational activist. Journal of Public Relations Research 14(1), 57 84.

PAGE 202

202 Hon, L. & Grunig, J. E. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations Gainsville, FL: Institute for Public Relat ions. Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2000). Leadership in the shaping and implementation of collaboration agendas: How things happen in a (not quite) joined up world. Academy of Management Journal, Huxham, C. (2003). Theorizing collaboration practice. Public Management Review 5(3), Ihlen, O. & van Ruler, B. (2007). How public relations works: Theoretical roots and public relations perspectives. Public Relations Review 33 (3), 243 248 Ihlen, O. (2007). Building on Bourdieu: A sociological grasp of public relations. Public Relations Review 33 (3), 269 274. Ihlen, O., van Ruler, B., & Fredriksson, M. (Eds.) (2009). Public Relations and social theory: key figures and co ncepts New York : Routledge. Inspectoratul Scolar Buzau. Rolul Inspectoratului scolar Judetean Buzau. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from www.isjbz.ro Jacobson, T. (1994). Modernization and post modernization approache s to participatory communication for development. In S.A. White, K.S. Nair and A. Joseph (Eds.), Participatory communication: Working for change and development (pp. 60 75). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Kelly, K.S. (1998). Effective Fund Raising Management New York NY: Routledge. Keyton, J., Ford D., & Smith, F. (2008). A m esolevel c ommunicative m odel of c ollaboration. Communication Theory 18, 376 406. Lawniczak, R. (2001). Transition p ublic r elations: An i nstrument for s ystemic t ransformatio n in Central and Eastern Europe. In R. Lawniczak (Ed.) Public Relations Contribution to transition in Central and Eastern Europe: Research and Practice Poznaf, Poland: Biuro Usnugowo Handlowe, Printer, pp. 7 18. Lawrence, T. B., Hardy, C., & Phillips, N (2002). Institutional effects of interorganizational collaboration: The emergence of proto institutions. Academy of Management Journal Le Ber, M. & Branzei, O. (2009). Towards a critical theory of value creation in cross sector partnerships. Organization 17(5), 599 629. Le Ber, M. & B ranzei, O. (2010). (Re)Forming strategic cross sector partnerships: Relational p r oc esses of social i nnovation. Business & Society 49(1), 140 172.

PAGE 203

203 Leding ham, J.A. (2006). Relationship management: A general theory for public r elations. In C. Botan, & V. Hazleton (Eds.) Public relations t heory II New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 465 485. Le dingham, J.A. & Bruning, S.D. (1998). Relationship management and public relations: Dimensions of an organization public relationship. Public Relations Review 24, 55 65. Ledingham, J.A. & Bruning, S.D. (2000). A longitudinal study of organization publi c relationship dimensions: Defining the role of communication in the practice of relationship management. In J.A. Ledingham & S.D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational approach to public relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Ledingham, J.A. & Bruning, S.D. (2003). Explicating relationship management as a general theory of public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research 15(2), 181 192. Liiceanu, A., Saucan, D. & Calugaru D. (2007). pentru profesori, diriginti, si consilieri scolari Retrieved January 3, 2011, from www.viatameaunjocserios.ro Livesey, S., Hartman, C., Stafford, E., Shearer, M. (2009). Perfor ming sustainable development through eco colaboration. Journal of Business Communication 46 (4), 423 454. Luoma aho, V. (2009). On Putnam : bowling together -applying Putnam's theories of community and social capital to public relations. In O. Ihlen., B van Ruler & M. Fredriksson (Eds.) Public Relations and social theory: key figures and concepts New York : Routledge, 2009 pp. 156 173 Melkote, S. R., & Steeves, H. L. (2001). Communication for development in the third world: Theories and practice fo r empowerment (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Millennium Goals. (2008). United Nations Website. Retrieved October 20, 2010, from http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/ Miller, J. (2010, N ovember 4). Private sector emerges as key partner in food a id. Development Newswire Retrieved on November 4, 2010 from www.devex.com Mitulescu, S. & Simache, D. (2008). Experiente educationale non formale in viat a t inerilor. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from www.ise.ro Molleda, J.C. (2001). International paradigms : The Latin American School of P ublic Relations. Journalism Studies 2(4), 513 530.

PAGE 204

204 Molleda, J.C., & Ferguson, M.A. (2004). Public relations roles in Brazil: hierarchy eclipses gender differences. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16 (4), 327 351 Molleda, J.C., Martinez, B., & Suarez, A.M. (2008). Building multi sector partnerships for progress with strategic, p a rticipatory communication: A case study from C olombia. Revista Anagramas 6(12), 105 125. Morse, R. (2010) Integrative public leadership: Catalyzing collaboration to create public value. The Leadership Quarterly 21, 231 245. Moss Kanter, R., (1994). Col laborative advantage. Harvard Business Review July August 145 160. Nelson, J. (2007, December 17). The Future of Partnerships. Compact Quarterly Retrieved September 2, 2010 from http://www.ene wsbuilder.net/globalcompact/ O'Leary, R., Gerard, C., & Bingham, L. B. (2006). Introduction to the symposium on collaborative public management. Public Administration Review Ospina, S. & Foldy, E. (2010). Building bridges from the margins: The work of leadership in social change organizations. The Leadership Quarterly 21, 292 307. Page, S. (2010). Integrative leadership for collaborative governance: Civic eng agement in Seattle. The Leadership Quarterly 21, pp. 246 263. Provan, K. G., & Kenis, P. (2008). Modes of network governance: Structure, management, and effectiveness. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory Putnam, R. (200 0). Bowling alone: the collapse and revival of American community New York: Simon & Schuster. Realitatea TV News (2007, December 12). Teme delicate Retrieved from IMAGE Public Relations internal monitoring report. Symbiotic Sustainabil ity model: Conceptualizing NGO corporate alliance c ommunication. Journal of Communication 60, 577 609 Silvia, C. & McGuire, M. (2010). Leading public sector networks: An empirical examination of integrative leadership behaviors. Th e Leadership Quarterly, 21, 264 277

PAGE 205

205 Sny der, L. B. (2002). Development communication c ampaigns. In W. B. Gudykunst & B. Mody (Eds.), Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication (pp. 457 478). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Thomlison, T.D. (2000). An interpersonal primer with implications for public relations. In J.A. Ledingham & S.D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational approach to public relations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. United Nations Office for Partnerships. Retrieved November 11, 2010 from www.un.org/partnerships/ Weber, E. P. (1998). Pluralism by the rules Washington: Georgetown University Press. Williams, P. (2002). The competent boundary spanner. Public Administration 80(1), Wilson, A. & Charlton, K. (1997). Making p artnerships w ork a p ractical guide for the public, private, voluntary, and community s ectors York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Wimmer, R. & Domonick, J. (2006). Mass media research: An i ntrodu ction Belmont, CA : Thomson, Wadsworth. Yin, R.K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods Newbury Park, NJ: Sage Publications.

PAGE 206

206 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH A ndreea L aura S avu was born in Bucharest, Romania, in 1986 to Daniela and Romeo Savu. She lived and studied in Romania and got communications and public relations at th e National School of Political a nd Administrative Studies in Bucharest. She worked for almost three years at one of the top public relations agencies in Roman ia Image Public Relations as an account executi ve. In 2009 she received the Fulbright Junior Award and began her master at the University of Florida, in mass communication with a specialization in public relations. During her second year of study, sh e enjoyed teaching the lab pa rt of an undergraduate class Writing for Mass Communication. In May 2011, Ms. Savu graduated with a Master of Arts in Mass Communication, with a specialization in public relations from the University of Florida. Her research interests focus on communication for development and social change, as well as policy advocacy. As her Fulbright grant was completed through graduation, she went back to Europe. She further hopes to contribute to the development field through her acquired communication expertise.