Emma Richardson

6 months ago

In response to my "Do Something" Exercise. I would start the project but just with 1 or 2 villages - which would use a limited budget - and save some money - I would work with selected representatives from the other villages until the full money for the project arrived.

Alejandro Javier Diaz Petit

6 months ago

I believe that what should be done is to project with the budget and resources that are currently available, answer how far I can go and the impact that would be had, in order to begin the first phase with a real scope available.

Abbie

5 months ago

The scenario says that they don't have the money to do 'all' of the activities planned which suggests that they can do 'some' of the planned activities. An important question would be what are these activities, what do we mean by activities? Do they have what they need to effectively and safely respond to tiger call outs? If yes, then they should start the project and members of the team should continue fundraising while they start (Do something). If no, then the project should not begin because people and tigers might both be at risk, they should wait until the money is available (Do no harm).

Bree

5 months ago

Yes - they should start the project and i would suggest that they start small, perhaps in one village and see how the plan actually works in real life. They can then assess if they actually need to do all the activities they planned or if they could combine/remove activities. Then if they are seeing positive results, then they could slowly expand the project or stop and re-evaluate if the plan needs to change

Fiona

5 months ago

I agree with what's been written, but there are several considerations as to what the "something" is ....

Before starting, I'd want to understand what the minimum viable version of the project looks like—what absolutely needs to happen to make a meaningful impact, and what’s more of a ‘nice to have’. I’d also ask whether leaving out later activities would weaken the effect of the earlier ones—if it does, the conservation outcome might be compromised. For example, if the initial training of volunteers goes ahead but there’s no funding for equipment, they might forget how to use the equipment effectively or move on to something else, meaning someone new would need to be retrained later on.

I think it would be wise to focus all the available resources on one village as a pilot, to show the value and build momentum, rather than spreading too thin across several villages. I’d also want to weigh up the risks of delaying the project or changing its scope—would that lead to more human-wildlife conflict, or lose local interest / volunteers and support?

Overall, I think it’s important to do something, but what that looks like should be shaped by the answers to those questions.

Katherine Butt

5 months ago

I agree with evyerone's existing comments that they should go ahead with the limited budget, just not necessarily with the full original plan. This is a perfect example of where the “Do Something” and “Focus on Impact” principles come in. Rather than waiting until they have full funding, they could prioritise the activities that will have the greatest immediate impact, maybe things like community awareness, training key volunteers.

It’s also a chance to apply “Embrace Change” by adapting the plan to current resources while continuing to fundraise or look for partnerships or other resources along the way. Getting started, even in a small way, helps build momentum, strengthen relationships with the community, and demonstrate progress to potential funders. Doing something is better than doing nothing.

Charley Bird

4 months ago

Applying the 'do something' principle, I would still start the project. Begin with what tasks can be done, and assign some project team members to look into the fundraising side of things, to ensure that sufficient funding is secured to complete other tasks in the project that require more money. 

Also applying the 'embrace change' principle, not having enough money is a challenge that the project must be adapted around!

'Focus on impact' should be prioritised. What measurable impact can there be if the funding for some reason is never obtained? Does the project need to be scrapped and a new one created?

I would suggest a project review to decide the best way forward to adapt to this change and still achieve maximum impact. 

Andy East

4 months ago

They should look to see either which tasks can be done with no budget (e.g. a team member training volunteers / meeting with village to get volunteers) or see what budget they do have an prioritise tasks based on impact and how much they can afford to do at that time.