I N T E R V I E W

Ñ Elaine Wright

Insight: Throughout your experience in the CEE, both as a trainer and as a consultant, do you see any changes?

Elaine Wright: I see tremendous growth. Seven years ago, when I delivered the EIA module the facilitators even had difficulty with the English language, but the facilitators I observed in the last two years in CEE seem to have acquired fluency in English. Before, they seemed to be unfamiliar with the concept of facilitation, public participation (i.e. communication with the public), now they are not. Much conflict existed between people who represented the NGOs and those who represented the government and now such conflict is no longer reflected in the courses. The groups have become more sophisticated, very dedicated and unlike the groups taught in the United States, they are more focused and have a burning desire to learn.

I: Tell us about the course.

EW: The MEO is a basic supervisory management course that prepares participants to be project managers and to be ready to manage several project areas. It assists participants to manage larger organisations. The skills taught in this course could be used, for example, to manage an NGO, a chemicals industry or government organisation. They are basic management skills applicable to many different situations.

I: Do you see the MEO as relevant to CEE?

EW: Yes, I see special relevance to CEE, as more funding is obtained and project managers must increasingly work with all different types of bureaucracies like the EU, etc. The course also provides the opportunity to bring together trainers from the region and solidifies the relationship established between them. It also brings up the issue of how to communicate in a cross-cultural environment.

I: Tell us the main difference of the first from the second delivery of the MEO.

EW: Because of the cooperation between the EPA and the REC (Regional Environmental Center for Central and Eastern Europe) and because the REC was identified as a well established organisation in the region, it was decided to deliver the very first MEO module in Szentendre, Hungary. The infrastructure, management and language skills that the REC provides made it feasible for the EPA to deliver the first course there.

  One of the differences is between participants. Last year they were focusing on the word "environment," while this year they see it as a management course. So since last year the word spread that this course is a management course, a communication course, a supervision course. This time the participants came with an understanding of what the course is, they knew what to expect and this was one of the factors of its success.

  The most important factors in the successful delivery of MEO-2 were the two facilitators from the region who have participated in the course last year. Anila Maliqi and Cristina Motoi from Romania. Both brought their own skills, personalities and the mix with the two USEPA trainers was effective. Preparation behind the scenes was very smooth, and it was good for participants to see how their colleagues were able to deliver the course.

  One point that was asked of me by participants was what can they do with this course. My view is that anyone in this course can take the module and can take parts of it or all of it and be more innovative in how they wish to re-deliver it in their respective countries. The course has been given in Russian, in Albanian and partly in Bulgarian.

I: What are the differences, in your view as a trainer, between training sessions in the US and in the CEE?

EW: The icebreakers one does in the CEE could not be done in the US. Here, for example, the participants want to finish the exercise, argue the point, while in the US participants are not as concerned in getting the right answer at the end.

  Participation is probably a bit more in the US but when I deliver a course in the US it is amongst native English speakers while here participants must translate it first. This may be a factor justifying the relatively lower level of participation. For this, I force participation through small group exercises as opposed to a large group discussion as one does in the US.

  In the US one does more lectures but here training may last for 8-9 hours a day and one simply cannot have lectures. One needs to get moving in, do exercises, workshops and break into smaller group activities. The energy level is about the same as the intelligence. The management experience in the US seems to be higher although here one seems to find greater variety of experiences.

I: What is your single most important contribution as a trainer to transfer know-how to the region?

EW: I don't know that I am transferring techniques or methods to the region because I learned more from the region than I taught. I think what I brought is the idea that delivery of the module can be humorous and fun and yet one can still convey knowledge. I also think that when one delivers this course, it is important to have people with good consultation skills, but also strong management skills and experience so that they can relate the learning to specific examples that occurred in their career and answer questions with real life examples. Perhaps the most important aspect I have managed to transfer here is that teaching of this course can be applied to real life.

I: What did you learn?

EW: I learned how to take the text and repeat it on overheads and different words so that you are constantly reinforcing what you are teaching. I learned a basic facilitation principle, that is: you say it once, you say it again, and again and again.

  I also learned new icebreakers, the importance of play in a situation to keep the energy and attention up as well as the focus of the participants.

I: What would be the follow up of this module?

EW: Funding is always a problem. I would like to see the course redelivered at the REC for more trainers and translated into more languages. There should be more delivery of ToTs on other module topics and more trainers should be sent to learn from EPA. The support given from REC in such delivery makes it very easy for the trainer to teach the course. The super-structure of the organiz-ation and the effective management is enabling us to deliver the course smoothly. In other words we don't have to worry about anything other than the delivery of the course. This is not the case in other parts of the world.