NATIONAL INFLUENCING

GUIDELINES
These guidelines aim to provide simple guidance for Oxfam staff on how to engage
in influencing work at the national level. They cover the basic principles for
engaging in influencing: from developing a power analysis and a theory of change,
to recommendations for creating influencing strategies in different contexts, to
considerations for risk management and monitoring and evaluation work.
 2 National Influencing Guidelines

CONTENTS
1. Summary 1
2. Foreword 4
3. Background 5
What is WIN? 6
Purpose and scope 7
Oxfam’s powerful global network 8
Defining “National Influencing” 9
How do these guidelines apply to affiliates? 9
4. Influencing “Building Blocks”: Theory of Change and Power Analysis 10
What is a Theory of Change? 10
Why does power matter? 10
What is a power analysis? 10
Power analysis:key questions to ask– what,who, where and how? 11
5. Oxfam’s role 14
Oxfam, civil society and social movements 15
Oxfam and governments 17
Oxfam and the private sector 19
6. Operating in different country contexts 21
Political spectrum 21
Civil/Social spectrum 22
Economic Spectrum 22
Fragility 23
7. The importance of gender in national influencing 24
8. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) 26
9. Risk and risk management 27
Types of risks associated with influencing work 28
10. Internal mechanisms to facilitate country influencing 30
11. Digital tools and technologies 31
Annex 1. Partnerships 32
What is a partnership? 32
Annex 2. Working with civil society and social movements 33
Key principles 33
Annex 3. Working with governments 35
How Oxfam works with governments 35
Key principles 35
Annex 4. Working with the private sector 36
Choosing an approach – what approach works best when? 36
Key principles for private sector interaction 37
Annex 5. OI gender guidelines on southern influencing 38
Oxfam’s approach to gender 38
Basic principles to guide the mainstreaming of women’s rights and gender equality into influencing work 39
Key questions to ask when designing and implementinginfluencing work 39
Annex 6. Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning (MEL) 42
Annex 7. Risk and risk management (framework, process, tool and example) 46
Annex 8. Links to useful resources and case studies 48
 3 National Influencing Guidelines

1 Summary
These guidelines aim to strengthen the capacity of Oxfam staff to engage in influencing work at the
national level. They have been written primarily for country-based and regional staff. They aim to support
those with some experience of influencing, as well as those who are new to influencing work.
These guidelines complement Oxfam’s Strategic Plan (OSP) 2013–2019, in which Oxfam outlines its
ambition to become a Worldwide Influencing Network (WIN). Influencing is not new to Oxfam; it has been a
core part of Oxfam’s work since the organisation began. WIN recognises this and seeks to build on it.
Designed for staff in various roles (programme managers, country directors, technical team leaders, and
campaigns and advocacy staff) they are intended to be a simple “one stop shop” guidance on Oxfam’s
approach to national influencing under WIN and are designed to be a flexible and empowering resource to
inform country-level planning and practice. By demonstrating principles rather than being prescriptive,
the guidelines aim to enhance the ability of staff to make sound context-specific judgements.
These Guidelines replace the 2004 “OI Southern Campaigning Guidelines” and build upon and draw together
the most pertinent content of a diverse range of Oxfam agreements and thinking relevant to national
influencing.
Key points to note are:
• Oxfam seeks to support partners and allies in their efforts to strengthen civil society because they have
primary legitimacy in their own countries and because we believe that this will have most impact in terms
of promoting sustainable change. We strive to raise and amplify the voices of citizens.
• Oxfam is an independent actor in its own right that can act directly or alongside partners, where this
would increase the impact on poverty and injustice.
• Oxfam and its partners work in hugely diverse contexts; approaches to influencing will be tailored
accordingly.
• Oxfam’s influencing work must be based on a clear understanding of the different ways in which women
and men are affected by poverty.
• Oxfam’s mission to build a future free from the injustice of poverty will challenge those in power.
Challenging power carries risk. Success requires calculated risk taking based on sound risk assessments,
good judgments, and effective risk management.
 4 National Influencing Guidelines

2 foreword

For Oxfam, influencing is not only a tool, it is part of who we are. Whether it is working to ensure there
is adequate humanitarian space so a response can take place quickly and effectively, learning from the
best of our country programs and advocating for replication at scale, supporting partners to hold their
government to account for delivery of essential services, or lobbying a G20 member to adopt policies that will
empower people living in poverty, influencing has a key role to play in every country in which Oxfam works.
This is why the Executive Directors have agreed that we will take our Worldwide Influencing Network (WIN)
agenda deep into our programming work as well as our global campaigns. Doing so not only means we are
being true to ourselves, it maximizes our impact on poverty, inequality and injustice.
These National Influencing Guidelines are designed to help Oxfam staff around the world to influence
effectively at the national level, in both the north and south. The exact way they are applied will vary
acccording to context: they offer a range of practical, tried and tested ways to maximize our impact
through putting influencing at the heart of our One Program Approach.
I trust that you will find the National Influencing Guidelines useful as we work together to overcome the
injustice of poverty.

Winnie Byanyima
Executive Director, Oxfam International
 5 National Influencing Guidelines

3 background
Oxfam is part of a global movement for change, one that empowers people to create a future that is
secure, just, and free from poverty. We will only achieve lasting change in the lives of the hundreds of
millions of people living in poverty if we use our limited resources to influence and enable others.
Influencing has been a core part of Oxfam’s mandate since the organisation was first created in 1942 with
the objective of providing relief assistance to civilians while simultaneously challenging UK government
policy on collective punishment in Nazi-occupied Greece. Through working with social movements in
South Africa to build national resistance to Apartheid; supporting women’s movements in Central America
to secure legal protection against violence; leveraging programme experience to achieve the abolition of
health user fees in Zambia; and securing a global Arms Trade Treaty, Oxfam has continued to engage in
influencing in the different contexts in which it works.
Oxfam’s work is based on the understanding that unequal power relations are the underlying driver of
inequality, poverty and suffering. Addressing these power relations is deeply political and gets to the root
cause of poverty and injustice. Oxfam seeks to confront these imbalances of power in order to change
policy and practice in ways that improve the lives of men and women living in poverty.

AMIN
 6 National Influencing Guidelines

Oxfam has for some time recognized the multi-polar world in which we now live and in which power is
shifting. We need to respond to this and be able to influence new powers in order to prepare ourselves
for the 21st century. This means scaling up our work in the South and in the new emerging powers, and
changing our make-up to reflect this new world order. Crucially we need to do much more to recognise
the nation state and the private sector in developing countries and the national context as where there
is major scope to influence changes in policies and practices that will benefit millions. While continuing
to make the best use of Oxfam’s unique presence and influence at multiple levels (from the local to the
global). This will require a refocusing of both our campaigning and programming efforts.

What is WIN?
In developing its 2013–2019 Strategic Plan, Oxfam has concluded that its existing Global Campaigning
Force (GCF) model, for influencing policies and practices, is no longer fit to address the rapid political,
economic, demographic, and social transformations that will shape the next decade.
Accordingly, in its new Strategic Plan, Oxfam has outlined its ambition to become a Worldwide Influencing
Network (WIN)1 with the following impact:

By 2020, Oxfam will have contributed to achieve more profound and lasting change
in the lives of people living with poverty and injustice. We will have done this at
a far greater scale by creating a world-wide influencing network (WIN) of One
Program teams, united by a common vision for change, adequately resourced,
able to use the full range of influencing techniques at their disposal, and actively
participating in a wider movement to fight against the injustice of poverty.”

In particular, WIN will drive a geographical and functional reallocation of Oxfam’s resources towards country
teams, bringing Oxfam’s influencing work much closer to country programmes, while ensuring consistency
with global-level work through agreed change goals, campaigns, and private sector strategies.

The Worldwide Influencing Network will differ from Oxfam’s existing model in several ways. It will be a more
holistic influencing model focused on the power, attitudes, and beliefs that underlie poverty and injustice.
It will target powerful interests, exploiting disruptive opportunities for change (e.g. an election or a natural
disaster) and promoting innovative and scalable solutions (drawing on programme experience). Oxfam’s
programme work will be key in providing evidence to underpin our influencing work.
WIN is about organisational progress and requires development, humanitarian and campaigns staff at all
levels to change the way they think and work. WIN includes public campaigning and advocacy, but extends
beyond Oxfam’s previous campaigns model to use the whole of our One Programme Approach to contribute
to transformative change.
Many development and humanitarian programme teams are already engaged in influencing work through
meetings with local government officials to coordinate the provision of basic services or working with
partners to build their negotiation/organisational capacity to engage with government. WIN seeks
to strengthen this work, increase its ambition, and make it more consistent across our programmes
reinforcing the One Programme Approach by further integrating Oxfam’s humanitarian, development, and
campaigns work.

1
Documents related to WIN can be found here:
https://sumus.oxfam.org/oxfam-strategic-plan-2013-19/wiki/enabling-change-goal-group-worldwide-influencing-network-win
 7 National Influencing Guidelines

Oxfam’s Executive Directors (EDs) have approved three priorities for WIN in the first phase of
implementing the OSP:
1. Achieving a giant leap forward in national-level influencing in the South;
2. Strengthening people’s voices and mobilising for impact in the digital age;
3. Strengthening Oxfam’s position as a thought leader.
Within this first phase of WIN, it was agreed by the EDs that Oxfam needs a single, simple set of national
influencing guidelines to inform the work we do (including the development of new JCAS and JRAS2 to align
with the 2013–2019 Oxfam Strategic Plan).

Noah Friedman-Rudovsky

Purpose and scope

These guidelines focus on influencing at a national level for four reasons:
• Achieving impact on the ground depends on national level change, which has historically been
underplayed relative to global campaigns. In light of the external context and Oxfam’s new Strategic Plan,
Oxfam’s capacity for national-level influencing, particularly in the South, needs to be reinforced.
• National-level influencing will help us to achieve impact at scale and to leverage evidence and experience
from our existing local and national programmes and relationships.
• Influencing is a requirement of all affiliate, regional, and country strategies (JRAS and JCAS) under the new
Strategic Plan.
• In the past there has been debate about the role of Oxfam in influencing in Southern countries.

2
JCAS: Joint Country Analysis Strategies/JRAS: Joint Regional Analysis Strategies
 8 National Influencing Guidelines

Oxfam’s powerful global network

Oxfam’s efforts to reinforce influencing work at the national level through WIN do not mean that linking
our influencing work across levels (local, national, regional, global) is not important. Indeed this is one of
Oxfam’s greatest strengths and key to increasing the scale of our impact.
The world is an increasingly interlinked place and those who hold power to create (and block) change
in a given country are often outside its national borders. Oxfam’s unique added value is its role as an
international actor with presence at all levels. This puts Oxfam in the distinct position of being able to push a
national issue in the global arena, creating pressure for change at multiple levels. This is particularly important
when national space for change is closed (e.g. due to oppressive governments) and rights are violated, or
when a country’s power analysis determines that the balance of power lies with external stakeholders.
Guatemala is an example of this. US and Canadian mining companies are violating the rights of local
indigenous people and small-holder farmer communities. There is a clear opportunity in a case like this to
use Oxfam’s networks in the US and Canada to target these companies.
Another example of work outside the national sphere is the advocacy done to regulate mining deals in
West Africa. Individual West African countries found it difficult to negotiate the best possible deals with
foreign mining companies in part because of the threat from these companies that they would take their
investment to neighbouring countries. In order to stop this “race to the bottom”, Oxfam and partners worked
with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to establish regional mining regulations.

When national- and global-level teams are working on shared objectives in their influencing work there
will be opportunities for national cases to be used as “iconic cases” within a broader Oxfam campaign.
This can offer huge benefits for creating change both at the national and the international level but can
also carry risks which will need to be managed. Country strategies should seek opportunities to achieve
greater impact by leveraging regional and global influence. Likewise, global influencing efforts must seek,
wherever possible, to reinforce the concrete impact of influencing in Southern countries.

For more information on the ECOWAS case study follow the link here.

Case study Regional- and global-level influencing

Influencing at the regional and global level Oxfam’s power analysis of the regional context
can support national-level change when it is indicated that the Association of Southeast
informed by a good power analysis and when it Asian Nations (ASEAN) would have greater
complements the country’s theory of change. influence than most Northern governments
Oxfam’s understanding of global and regional on the Myanmar government. Based on this
institutions, and our access to key decision- analysis, Oxfam lobbied the ASEAN Secretariat
makers in regional or global capitals, has and its member countries to negotiate and
often helped country programmes advocate persuade the Myanmar government to grant
for a specific policy or practice change. In humanitarian access. Following negotiations
the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis, it was very through ASEAN, the Myanmar government
difficult for Oxfam and other agencies to get agreed to a tripartite group that
humanitarian access to the affected areas in coordinated the relief operation and ensured
Myanmar. The government was unwilling to allow humanitarian access to the aid agencies. This
humanitarian agencies to enter the country group consisted of ASEAN, the UN, and the
despite calls from international community, Myanmar government. This move paved the way
especially northern governments, to do so. for more external access and assistance.
 9 National Influencing Guidelines

Quick Guide to Power Analysis” Defining “national influencing”.

Influence (n) “the effect of one person or power on another”
For Oxfam, “influencing” means systematic efforts to change power relationships, attitudes, and beliefs,
and the formulation and implementation of official policies, laws/regulations, budgets, and company
policies and practices, in ways that promote more just societies without poverty. Depending on the
context, influencing can include: leveraging of programme experience, advocacy, and campaigning
(including coalition building, research, policy development, lobbying, media, digital tools), mobilisation
(of activists, supporters, citizens), coordinated worldwide communicating and networking, capacity
development (of citizens, partners, civil society, duty bearers), partnerships and strategic funding. Duty
bearers can include public, semi-public and private entities.
Influencing is not an end in itself, but it is a means to an end – namely, positive and sustainable change at
scale in the lives of people living in poverty. Influencing is applicable in all countries in which Oxfam works,
but the way it is implemented will vary according to the context.

How do these guidelines apply to affiliates?

Affiliates have some unique attributes (as compared to many country programmes):
• Affiliates are both donors and fundraisers in their home markets. They need to raise money publicly, as
well engage the public for social change.
• Affiliates actively promote the Oxfam brand and seek to use Oxfam’s profile to assist in fundraising.
• Affiliates are indigenous legal entities and have a role in directly influencing power holders in their
country, with or without partners.
• Affiliates will often seek to invest in programmes outside their home markets.
While most of the principles in these guidelines apply to affiliates, there will be situations where affiliates
will be more proactive with their brand or more engaged in direct advocacy, service delivery or mobilisation
of citizens. Each affiliate should interpret these guidelines in a way that makes sense for their context and
domestic strategy.

GLENN EDWARDS
 10 National Influencing Guidelines

Influencing “building blocks”

4 Theory of change
and power analysis.
Two essential elements of any influencing strategy are a theory of change and a power analysis. These
should be developed as a joint exercise, bringing together humanitarian, development, and campaigning
staff/teams and taking into account the different assumptions, knowledge and skills they offer.

What is a theory of change?

A theory of change is essentially an explanation or story about how change happens in a given society and
how Oxfam can both respond and contribute to change. It focuses on the “how” as well as the “what” of
change and helps us to make explicit our assumptions about how transformative, lasting change happens
in a given context. It helps us to challenge, discuss, and improve our analysis and understanding of the
shifting spaces and possibilities for influencing.
For example, does change happen through formal state legislative processes in a given country? Or does
it happen at a local and informal level, through negotiations with traditional leaders? Or does change
happen outside the country among global multi-laterals, such as the World Bank?
There is no single “Theory of Change”. This is not a new hoop to jump through. Nor is it a one-off “do the
Theory of Change, write the document and tick the box” exercise. It’s a permanent way of thinking among
the team and with partners about the progress that we are (or are not) achieving and the assumptions we
are making.
This is usually done with partners and staff and can be carried out in a number of different ways, from
engaging in an in-depth, structured conversation with staff and partners, to the development of
diagrammatic frameworks, stories, and narratives which illustrate processes of change (see Annex 6:
Monitoring, evaluation and learning).

Why does power matter?

“Development is about power and its progressive redistribution from the haves to the have-nots”.
Winnie Byanyima, Oxfam International Executive Director
Power is a subtle and pervasive force-field. It connects individuals, communities, and nations, in a
constant process of negotiation, contestation, and change. It takes different forms: visible (politicians,
religious leaders), invisible (norms and values) and hidden (behind-the-scenes power of elites or the
military). Power lies at the heart of change or its denial.
One of Oxfam’s aims is to transform power relations so that men and women living in poverty have greater
influence over the policies, structures, and social norms that affect their lives. As an organisation that
put women’s rights at the heart of all we do, it is fundamental that Oxfam’s theory of change addresses
unequal gender and power relations.

What is a power analysis?

A power analysis identifies and maps out the multiple actors and types of power that affect a given situation
as well as analysing their interactions and relationships with each other. Having a detailed understanding
of the power relations at play helps us to identify who holds the most influence and therefore appropriate
entry points for our influencing strategies and programmes. It also helps us to identify our allies and those
from whom we can expect resistance or opposition. Oxfam should engage its partners in the development
of power analyses as they are best placed to understand the context and the power dynamics at play.
 11 National Influencing Guidelines

The complexity of power means that there is no ‘one size fits all’ solution to transforming power relations. To
bring about lasting change, Oxfam and our partners often need to act at more than one level, and address
more than one dimension of power simultaneously. For example, civil society actors may successfully
influence national policy or law, but without steps to ensure effective implementation of legislation, this will
not necessarily translate into improvements in the lives of women and men living in poverty.
Women and girls represent the majority of those in poverty that Oxfam is trying to reach. Therefore, our
influencing propositions and strategies must recognise and respond to the specific needs and capacities
of women and girls.

RAJENDRA SHAW

Power analysis: Key questions to ask – what, who, where, and how?
What? (Sectors, issues, and power).
What aspects of poverty and marginalisation is Oxfam seeking to address through its strategy or
programmes? What changes are Oxfam and its partners and allies trying to affect in the lives of poor and
marginalised groups? Which kinds of power relations are relevant (e.g. visible, invisible, hidden,)? What are
the gender dimensions and impacts of these power relations?
Who? (Actors, organisations and institutions).
Who are the main actors involved (women or men living in poverty, communities, decision makers, donors)
and what are their views, and degrees of influence, over the change Oxfam seeks to achieve? Beyond
these leading players, what other individuals or institutions (media, religious institutions, intellectuals,
global multi-laterals) are relevant and influential? Country teams should consider the regional and global
actors and institutions that may be important in creating change. This includes formal actors (donor
governments, multi-laterals, foreign government investment banks), as well as private and informal actors
(private sector investors, diaspora).
 12 National Influencing Guidelines

It is critical to engage women who may want to serve as leaders in achieving transformative change. Do
not perpetuate normative gender relations by only engaging with the conventional power-holders in the
community (often men).
Once you have mapped these actors, their motives/incentives, and the interactions between them, it is
important to seek to identify the likely champions, blockers, and swingers. In any power analysis there
will be competing forces: some “champions” of the change we seek, some “blockers” who will seek to
prevent the change, and some “swingers” who may be convinced to become champions for the change.
It is important to judge what would strengthen the will of the champions, undermine the blockers’
opposition, and persuade the swingers to move into the champions group. Understanding how powerful
the blockers are as well as what motivates them and what it would take to disempower them can be the
most challenging aspect of this. Doing the analysis with partners can strengthen this understanding.
Where? (Levels and spaces).
Where do people operate who are seeking (or blocking) the changes sought by Oxfam? Are they closed
“spaces” where women and/or civil society have no access or input, spaces to which civil society is
invited and where they are listened to, or spaces which civil society can claim or demand voice from
outside? Do the relevant changes and decisions take place at household, community, company, industry,
national government or municipal level?
How? (Strategies, methods, and models).
Power analysis helps Oxfam to hypothesise about how the desired change may occur and initial strategies
that could contribute to change. Some key parameters for discussion include:

Approach
Based on your theory of change and power analysis, what is most likely to influence the individuals and
institutions whose support is identified as necessary to bring about change? Is the barrier to change created
by laws and policies, or social norms, attitudes, and beliefs? Is the issue one of providing evidence for the
benefits of the change? Would a successful example (e.g. a pilot project or evidence from a neighbouring
country) persuade? Or is this more likely to be about public contestation than cooperation – popular
campaigning, use of media and social media, celebrities and political mobilisation? How can the approach
ensure the meaningful inclusion of the voices and agendas of women and marginalised groups?

Alliances
Based on your theory of change and power analysis, what combination of allies (likely or unlikely) will
maximise the chances of success? A joint approach with a private sector company or industry body? A
traditional partnership with a local CSO or NGO? Building broad NGO coalitions? Forging relationships with
sympathetic individuals or ministries within government?

Events
Is change most likely to occur around a specific event, whether foreseeable (e.g. an election campaign,
national budget, or planning cycle) or unforeseeable (e.g. the death of a leader, a natural disaster,
economic crisis, or conflict)? How do we prepare for and respond rapidly to the opportunities to promote
change created by such “shocks”? How do we work with others to spot and exploit opportunities for
transformation? Which groups (whether women or otherwise) might be most at risk when those changes
happen? How do we work with our partners and allies to manage risks to vulnerable groups?

Complexity
Is the change to which Oxfam seeks to contribute relatively simple (government abolishes education user
fees), or complex and messy (how to help people feel less disempowered and excluded from decision-
making or how to address the social acceptance of violence against women)? The former lend themselves
to more traditional approaches such as evidence-based research, policy proposals, and public
 13 National Influencing Guidelines

campaigning. The latter are less predictable and will require more improvisation and experimentation (e.g.
supporting a range of experiments to identify and refine successful models). Complexity also requires
Oxfam staff to listen to partners and their experiences as well as using the best possible MEL approaches
that recognise and help us to understand complex change.
Every JCAS and JRAS should have a clear theory of change and power analysis. It’s important that these
are something that we return to and revise regularly. To undertake a high quality theory of change and
power analysis we must give time to understanding the past and present context and to developing good
external networks. It is important that external networking and rigorous analysis at a national level is
rewarded and valued internally.
Link to Quick Guide to Power Analysis
Link to case study from the Philippines which provides a good example of how to develop and use power
analysis: The People’s Survival Fund
A training pack on How Change Happens and Power Analysis can be found here.
Link to Power Analysis table and template

TOM PIETRASIK
 14 National Influencing Guidelines

5 OxFAM’s role

Oxfam is an independent actor and influencer in its own right, as are our partners and allies. In its mission
to end the injustice of poverty, Oxfam plays a number of different and evolving roles:
• Oxfam seeks to support partners and allies in their efforts to strengthen civil society. They have primary
legitimacy in their own countries and we believe that they will have most impact in terms of promoting
sustainable change. When we support in this way we will subsume our brand unless there is justification
for not doing so.
• Oxfam can also act directly (e.g. directly engaging power holders) where it is assessed that this would
increase the impact on poverty. This will be determined in consultation with staff and partners and based
on an assessment of the country-specific context and power analysis.
• Oxfam works to increase the accountability of those who hold power; including governments, the private
sector, and others.
• Oxfam directly engages with partners and with people living in poverty to ensure people’s rights are
met through the implementation of rights-based programme work (humanitarian, development, and
campaigns).
• Oxfam speaks from this direct experience which gives Oxfam its deep understanding of poverty and
injustice, but does not claim to speak for or on behalf of people living in poverty.
• Oxfam builds considerable knowledge and evidence from its programmatic experiences across the world,
as well as about the policies and issues that affect people living in poverty. It leverages this knowledge to
tackle the root causes of poverty.
• Oxfam is not a social movement but it is part of a worldwide civil society constituency for pro-poor change.
• Oxfam mobilises global solidarity through the millions of supporters, whether donors, partners or
volunteers, across the world who express their concerns and demands about poverty and injustice
through Oxfam.
• Oxfam has global reach at different levels (within countries and between them, among state and non-
state actors) which allows it to convene different actors to work on common problems.
• Oxfam is also a donor. Most commonly with partner organisations, it often provides financial and technical
backing. When we take on this role we should openly acknowledge the power dynamics at play and
introduce mechanisms to address them, for example, being transparent and open about our financial
backing (including its limits and conditions); being honest and clear about our expectations; building
relationships which enable partners to feel able to challenge Oxfam.
• In recognition of the power dynamics at play in these relationships, Oxfam must deliberately create
mutually empowering spaces to negotiate terms of engagement with our partners.
 15 National Influencing Guidelines

Why does Oxfam work with others?

Oxfam believes that it is only through the collective effort of many actors (civil society, women’s rights
organisations, government, trade unions, religious institutions, private sector, and others) that our goals
can be achieved. Each of these actors has a role to play in accordance with its responsibility, legitimacy,
capacity, and strengths. Oxfam seeks complementary relationships with other actors to harness the added
value each may bring. These relationships are critical for tailor-making our interventions to the local context,
for solidifying ownership among local actors, and for achieving impact in the programmes we support.

Reviewing and changing our partner portfolios3

As Oxfam focuses more on influencing in our country programmes and affiliates, we must be willing
to review our portfolio of partners on a regular basis. It is sometimes the case that we established a
partnership for a particular purpose but that partner is not interested in doing influencing work. Or it
may be that we have worked with a partner or coalition for a long time to build their capacity but they
are still not able to influence effectively. It may also be that the context has rapidly changed and that
our existing partners no longer represent a significant constituency. In such cases it may be necessary
and appropriate to bring the partnership to an end in order to use our scarce resources and time
on partnerships that better fit our influencing approach. It may also be that the partner is now well
established and able to secure substantial funding from other sources, or even compete with Oxfam for
donor funding. In such cases the nature of our partnership should necessarily change.

Please refer to Annex 1 (p.32) for more details on partnerships.

Oxfam’s Partnership Principles can be found here.

Oxfam, civil society, and social movements

What is civil society?
Oxfam defines civil society as a platform outside the state, corporate sector, and family, by which citizens
organise themselves formally or informally to further common interests and values, to develop opinions
and ideas, and to enter into a dialogue about society’s direction. Civil society is multifaceted and diverse.
Examples of civil society include women’s movements, trade unions, church groups, NGOs, community
groups, and many others.

Why is civil society important?

Without a strong civil society, state and corporate sector power is more likely to go unchallenged. A
strong civil society is necessary to create a system of checks and balances between the state, corporate
sector and citizens, acting as a buffer between the power of the state and the corporate sector on the
one hand and individual citizens on the other.
Women, and minority groups, are often excluded or sidelined in civil society organisations. Therefore, it is
vital we work with women’s rights organisations themselves and help to create enabling environments for
their leadership in civil society movements. Their collective action is crucial for driving transformational
change.
In an empowered civil society with strong women’s rights movements, citizens are able to demand and
collectively claim their rights from both the state and the corporate sector. They can hold decision makers
to account, usually leading to a more equitable distribution of capabilities and opportunities.

3
This text is drawn from “Draft Statement of Principles for Oxfam’s relations with Civil Society”. PDG, June 2012
 16 National Influencing Guidelines

The prominence and impact of social movements as one form of civil society is rapidly changing across
the South. These take many forms – temporary mobilisations, identity-based collective action, time-
bound interest groups centred around specific issues or volatile oppositional forces – and are a major
force for change. Some groups emerge and dissipate quickly, while others are long standing (i.e. women’s
and farmer’s movements). Strong social movements have been at the heart of many of the most significant
victories for social justice in which Oxfam has been involved.

Some key principles for working with civil society:

• In everything we do Oxfam must strengthen progressive domestic civil society.
• Oxfam does not speak for or on behalf of people living in poverty. We aim to support citizens to raise their
own voices.
• Oxfam is not a social movement, but we are an active member of a worldwide civil society constituency for
people’s rights. We can and should speak out and act directly on international issues.
• Oxfam seeks to strengthen and support local civil society, not displace it. Our staff can and must be active
partners who add value to domestic, regional and international civil society. We need to hire staff in each
country who are politically savvy and who can bring added value to each context.
• Oxfam uses its brand in Southern countries as a strategic tool only when valued by partners and allies (and
only when politically appropriate).

Case study Working with civil society

In 2011, ahead of the Zambian presidential and enabling recruitment of a Campaign Manager.
parliamentary elections, Oxfam joined several The campaign brought the issue of access to
essential services programme partners to health care to the fore during the election,
launch the “vote health for all” campaign. The resulting in a $126million rise in Zambia’s health
campaign set out to support communities to care budget under the new government.
raise their concerns about health care at the
national level and ensure that health care was
placed at the top of the political agenda. Partner
organisations from across Zambia formed a
coalition to define the key campaign issues and
a core team of partners was created to plan and
manage the campaign. Oxfam convened the
campaign’s coalition, bringing together its long-
term partners. It facilitated planning workshops
with partners, supported the development of
the strategy, and provided all of the financial
resources to deliver activities, as well as
 17 National Influencing Guidelines

Case study Working with think tanks

In many countries think tanks (sometimes An example of Oxfam’s work with think
called policy institutes) are an important tanks A few years ago, the Chinese government
and influential part of civil society. In more launched a policy that provided a range of
closed political systems, policy debate and benefits to a group of agricultural companies
contestation can often occur through think (known as Leading Agricultural Enterprises or
tanks, with competing agendas or analysis LAEs) in return for which they were required to
being advanced using these institutes as offer certain benefits to smallholder farmers
proxies. Even in more open political systems, in their supply chain (these included: work
different think tanks will research and advance opportunities and wage increases).
competing agendas.
Although the policy was launched and benefits
Think tanks are important potential partners approximately 110,000 LAEs there were no
for Oxfam, often able to complement our processes put in place to monitor the benefits
practical experience with research skills and offered to smallholder farmers. In response,
capacity that we do not have. It is important Oxfam Hong Kong partnered with the Research
for Oxfam and our partners to understand who Centre for Rural Economy (RCRE), the central
the most influential think tanks are, what their think tank of the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA)
political positioning is, their role in promoting or which is responsible for overseeing the policy
undermining change, how they are funded, and on LAEs. It supported the Centre to review the
how they are perceived by key constituencies. policy through extensive research, field visits,
and conferences, and to use the information
The WIN enabling change goal of the Oxfam
they collected to lobby policy change in the
Strategic Plan identifies the need for Oxfam to
MOA. As a result, the Chinese government
cultivate long-term knowledge partnerships
introduced new measures of accountability
with research institutions (some of which are
which will require LAEs to declare how they
think tanks) in developing countries.
benefit small rural households and to undergo
public monitoring to ensure that they are
meeting these aims.

See Annex 2 (p.33) for a full list of Oxfam’s key principles for engaging with civil society and social movements.

Oxfam and governments4

The role of government
Oxfam views governments as primary rights duty-bearers with responsibility to respect, protect and
promote people’s rights in every national context. As a core tenet of our work, Oxfam contributes to
holding governments to account for the progressive realisation of all human rights.

How Oxfam works with governments

Based on Oxfam’s relevant theory of change in each country context, we employ various approaches to
working with government. Government may be a partner in development as well as a target for advocacy.
For example, Oxfam and its partners may work with government to improve the capacity of the state to
discharge its responsibilities, or we may put pressure on government to fulfil its duties, or both.

4
This information is drawn from “Draft Oxfam Statement of Principles for relations with Governments.” PDG, June 2012
 18 National Influencing Guidelines

In practice, when working with government, we may alternate between “insider” and “outsider” strategies.
The choice of strategy should depend on what we believe will get the best result. There is a global trend
towards narrowing space for civil society. We need to challenge that trend and expand the space for rights
and deepen decision makers’ commitment to them.
This will normally require more than just insider strategies. It is critical that in every country we have a
sophisticated power analysis, an assessment of the appropriate role for Oxfam, and a risk assessment and
mitigation strategy.
Oxfam also engages in regional and global influencing at a national level in the South. National governments
represent their countries in international political groupings which Oxfam seeks to influence – the UNFCC,
G20, ASEAN, CSW, AU, etc. Likewise, Oxfam can support national government officials’ capacity to engage
in regional and global political processes.
Oxfam recognises that working with governments can be highly sensitive. We also recognise that
governments are internally heterogeneous with different levels of power (e.g. executive, legislature,
judiciary), different priorities, and different political drivers depending on the level of government (local,
provincial, national, etc.) or function (finance ministry, agriculture ministry, parliament, etc.). We must
work within both local law and our risk assessment of each country.
We are mindful that people on the front lines of supporting human rights take many risks and are themselves
frequently among the most vulnerable. This has been especially true for women’s rights workers who are
often targeted as a result of their work.5 Doing no harm to them is a basic principle we embrace.
Oxfam distinguishes between working with the professional civil service in a government and with
politicians, whether appointed or elected. Oxfam will seek to work with both where appropriate. When
working with politicians or political candidates, special care needs to be taken to be clearly non- partisan
and to be aware of risk. For example, if campaigning during an election Oxfam would target all potential
candidates. It is good for Oxfam to be political, it is not good for Oxfam to be party political.

“Once you talk about making things better you’re talking about politics”.
Chinua Achebe, Nigerian novelist, social commentator, poet, professor, and critic.

CAROLINE GLUCK

5
For more information, see AWID’s initiative on Women’s Human Rights Defenders: http://www.awid.org/Our-Initiatives/Women-Human-Rights-Defenders
 19 National Influencing Guidelines

Case study Working with governments

In Bolivia, Oxfam had good relations with On the basis of this, the Ministry developed
elements of the government, with whom it a policy proposal. To secure civil society and
had partnered on a number of initiatives. This government approval for the proposal, Oxfam
allowed the team to pursue an insider strategy. supported a consultation process, with a broad
alliance of farmers’ organisations, around
We worked directly with the government to
the expectations of an agricultural insurance
develop a policy for universal agricultural
scheme. It helped generate widespread media
insurance to protect smallholder farmers
coverage on the issue to build momentum
against the negative impacts of climate change.
locally and nationally for the insurance policy
Oxfam worked with colleagues across the world,
and consequently, the government set-up the
partners on the ground, and specialists in the
legal framework and institutional bodies to
field to collect data on the negative effect
implement a universal agricultural insurance.
of climate change on crops and farmers. We
provided funding for visits by foreign specialists The insurance scheme is already reaching
with experience in setting up similar initiatives 700,000 people, and will gradually be rolled out
and for technical support to employees at the to the rest of Bolivia.
Ministry for Rural and Agricultural Development.

Refer to Annex 3 (P.35) for more information on Oxfam’s Key Principles of working with government.

Oxfam and the private sector

The role of the private sector
The private sector is hugely diverse – ranging from small business to national and multinational
corporations, co-operatives, business associations, and the informal sector. These various private
sector actors have tremendous influence in today’s world. The impact of private sector activity on poverty
is complex and will be shaped by many variables including the nature of the company, the sector, the
international policy framework, national laws, and local context. Just as governments can reduce or
increase social inequalities, the private sector can both influence government policy (for better or worse)
and directly contribute to inclusive development (or undermine it).
Corporations can play an important part in contributing to sustainable human development and, in
particular, helping people to attain their right to a sustainable livelihood. Conversely, corporations can
also undermine the fundamental rights of vulnerable people and those living in poverty, and destroy
the environment.

Oxfam’s approach to the private sector

Oxfam believes that the private sector can make a positive contribution to poverty reduction and has a
responsibility to respect human rights. As such, Oxfam takes a multi-faceted approach to interaction
with the private sector. This is underpinned by the understanding that no partnership will affect Oxfam’s
freedom to express itself or carry out influencing according to its own criteria.6 Oxfam seeks to engage
with the private sector in a positive spirit of open collaboration and to assist business to work in ways

6
 xfam’s approach to the Private Sector is summarised in more detail in two important reference documents: The Executive Directors’ propositional state-
O
ment about the private sector https://sumus.oxfam.org/private-sector-team/documents/private-sector-increasing-oxfams-impact and “Increasing
Impact – Guidance and tools for Oxfam’s Private Sector Work”.
 20 National Influencing Guidelines

which enable people to realise their rights. Oxfam will, however, strongly challenge private sector actions
that threaten the rights and well-being of people and communities living in poverty. We will lobby to
ensure that private sector legal obligations are met and codes of conduct are strong and enforced.
Oxfam has five main approaches to the private sector which are dynamic and can co-exist:
• Influencing rules – influencing governments and intergovernmental organisations to promote and improve
regulatory frameworks for the private sector.
• Advocacy – addressing the private sector directly to change policies and practices, both through outside
or critical advocacy (campaigning, naming and shaming) and insider advocacy (internal influencing).
• Partnerships – active collaboration with business to generate new learning and innovation through both
programme and policy work.
• Doing business – Oxfam itself acting as a private sector actor, both as a consumer (procuring goods and
services) as well as an entrepreneur (providing goods and services - from fair trade products through our
shops to advice to businesses on Corporate Social Responsibility).
• Fundraising – establishing relationships with the private sector to obtain both gifts in cash and in kind.
For more detail on what approach works best and when see Annex 4 (p.36) on working with the private sector.7

Case study Working with the private sector

Oxfam engages with the private sector in a global relationship with Unilever, developing
wide spectrum of ways from collaboration domestic supply chains for smallholders,
to direct challenges. In general, different influencing the corporation’s practices
approaches are selected for different through participation on its advisory board,
companies depending on Oxfam’s objectives ongoing advocacy engagement, and receiving
and understanding of what is most likely to funding from its Foundation.
achieve the desired change in that company.
At the same time, Unilever was one of the
In the case of the food and beverage company ten food and beverage companies directly
Unilever, Oxfam has used a combination of targeted by Oxfam through the Behind
positive incentives and more challenging the Brands campaign, which publically
approaches. Oxfam has an established challenged Unilever, and others, to improve
their agricultural sourcing policies.

Obtaining both gifts in cash and in kind must follow Oxfam’s established ethical checking process. Details of this can be found in the OI Private Sector
7

engagement paper: https://sumus.oxfam.org/oxfam-novib-external-funding/documents/oi-guideline-work-private-sector-and-ethical-screening

 21 National Influencing Guidelines

6 Operating in different
country contexts

Oxfam and its partners contribute to change in a hugely diverse range of country contexts: from closed states
to robust democracies; from fragile states to powerful middle-income countries; from places where women
have mobility and political representation to places where they are excluded from public life; in conflict and
post-conflict settings; and in supporting both nascent, and sophisticated and inclusive civil societies.
Oxfam’s theory of change, power analysis, and approach to influencing will be tailored to different national
or sub-national operating contexts. Outlined below are the spectrums of three operating contexts, with
a brief illustration of how influencing strategies might change across each spectrum. It is acknowledged
that these spectrums are a simplification and that there are many other possible contexts.8

Political spectrum

Closed/Oppressive State Growing Civil Society Robust Democracy

As we move from left to right across the spectrum, there is generally an increase in the range of spaces
(forums in which civil society can engage and have voice), events (elections, budgets, etc.), and tools
(public advocacy, media, popular mobilisation, alliances, opinion leaders, etc.) available to Oxfam and
partners to influence other actors.

In all country contexts across the political spectrum Oxfam should seek to help open – or prevent closing
– civil society space, especially for marginalised groups identified in national strategies or subsequent
gender and power analyses.

Despite the significant political and security risks of operating in closed or oppressive state contexts,
Oxfam can and does successfully influence other important actors in these settings. This can involve
insider influencing strategies, such as organising policy dialogues and partnering with governments
to model and scale effective and accountable livelihoods or essential services programmes. It can also
involve the use of carefully managed outsider influencing strategies to support civil society to hold
governments to account. These strategies can build the capacity of both Oxfam and civil society to exploit
opportunities which may emerge from unexpected or disruptive change. This can involve leveraging our
relations with influential actors outside of the national government, such as with multi-lateral donors and
donor governments.

The following case studies include examples of where Oxfam has contributed to pro-poor change in
closed/oppressive states:
Advocacy v service delivery in Russia
How can NGOs influence states: case study from Vietnam

8
These spectrums emerged as the most useful from an extensive internal consultation and are being used to illustrate a point and aid our thinking.
 22 National Influencing Guidelines

Civil/social spectrum

Emergent or Suppressed Sophisicated, Inclusive

Growing Civil Society
Civil Society and Influential Civil Society

At all points along this spectrum Oxfam should seek to open and defend civil society space and to
strengthen and support local civil society, not displace it. Oxfam and partners can help create an enabling
environment for marginalised groups to organise and demand their rights.

At the left of the spectrum, Oxfam is more likely to invest in building the capacity of civil society
to influence other actors. We will potentially play a more direct role in areas including training,
accompaniment, organisational development (i.e. accountability and transparency), and technical and
strategic advice. It is also more likely that Oxfam will be requested to contribute its brand and expertise
to support the influencing work of an emergent or suppressed civil society (the principles which should
underpin this approach are outlined in the civil society section of these guidelines).

As we move from left to right across the spectrum, Oxfam’s more direct role usually reduces over time,
evolving to a more collaborative approach. This could involve Oxfam brokering connections between
civil society and state and non-state actors, leveraging Oxfam’s international network to generate
linkages for national actors (e.g. South-South connections, with the diplomatic community, multinational
organisations, the international media) and co-strategising to identify if and how Oxfam can best “add
value” to align civil society agendas.

It is important to recognise that the state and strength of civil society is never static in any given
context, it is dynamic. For example, civil society can be strong in a country during one period but weaken
significantly in a subsequent period due to changes in donor funding or a change in government. Civicus
(www.civicus.org) is a good source of analysis on the state of civil society in different countries.

Economic spectrum

Least Developed Transition Economy Middle Income

At the left end of the economic spectrum, Oxfam’s programming model tends to be more operational.
It often demands more humanitarian response capabilities and greater investment in partnerships for
long-term development programming with emergent civil society organisations. In these countries Oxfam
often has the greatest recognition, influence, and access to powerful stakeholders. Moving up the Human
Development Index into middle-income countries, Oxfam tends to be progressively less operational,
placing a greater emphasis on supporting civil society and influencing governments, companies, and
other powerful actors (e.g. on spending).

The reasons for this are clear; the majority of the nearly one billion people who live in poverty now live in
middle-income countries. Governments in these countries generally have both more resources at their
disposal and greater capability. In these contexts it is more likely that poverty and marginalisation is a
consequence of deliberate policy and budgetary choices through which people are denied their rights to
essential services, livelihood opportunities, and a voice in decisions affecting them.
 23 National Influencing Guidelines

One further international dimension to influencing progressively influential middle-income countries

relates to our agreement on influencing Southern members of the G20 through Oxfam’s G20/BRICSAM
Strategy. South-South international influencing is an increasingly important and effective approach
and one where Oxfam can play a unique role (e.g. Oxfam in Brazil working with Oxfam in Mozambique on
influencing Brazilian agricultural investment in Mozambique).

Fragility
Fragility cuts across all three spectrums. For example, “fragile states” may include countries where there
has been a formal transition to democracy but where the state still functions in a highly authoritarian
way (e.g. with strong dominance of the military in government institutions). Likewise, over the last
decade, fragile countries have become increasingly middle-income (Nigeria, Pakistan, Sudan, Yemen).
Often, when we think of fragility, the focus is on governance – the nature of the state (weak government,
poor legitimacy), role of elites, limited capacity of civil society groups, corruption, security, or the ability
to provide services and public goods. Nevertheless, there may be formal or informal opportunities for
influencing in such countries. Striking a balance between supporting positive change and managing and
minimising risk is the key to effective influencing in fragile contexts.
Some specific considerations when working on national influencing in a fragile context:
• Detailed power analysis is particularly important in a fragile context. It identifies opportunities for, and
barriers to, change and influence where the situation significantly constrains more formal ways of
working. Hidden and informal forms of power are likely to play significant roles.
• The speed of change can be an issue in fragile contexts, making close monitoring of both the context and
the effects of any activity particularly important.
• Indirect influencing approaches may be more effective in fragile contexts. For example, influencing
through work on livelihoods, infrastructure or humanitarian aid may be less likely to trigger a repressive
response than more confrontational approaches.
• In fragile contexts, the people/groups who are able to travel between different governance spaces (e.g. a
tribal leader who is also a government minister) can be critical to Oxfam’s potential influence.
• The need for a broad spectrum of relationships across different spaces is especially acute, given the
dominance of informal power; as is local knowledge and relationships of trust with key partners.
• Oxfam may find that those with power and influence in fragile contexts are armed and predatory actors
(e.g. defence units in northern Uganda, militias in South Sudan, paramilitaries and rebel groups in
Colombia). We may need to consider engaging with armed actors in contexts where they are shown to be
significant power-holders;
• Oxfam may need to use its capacity to influence at a global level in order to contribute external pressure
for change at national level in fragile contexts.
Oxfam’s Within and Without the State (WWS) project in South Sudan is building the understanding and
capacity of civil society and brokering opportunities for civil society to engage with power-holders. It is
one illustration of what influencing in a fragile context might look like. The project is using a number of
distinct approaches, including influencing legislation, harnessing the power of the media, and holding
face-to-face discussions with officials and power-holders.
The following are useful resources for thinking about influencing in fragile states:
Power and Fragility: Governance Programming in Fragile Contexts: A Programme Resource
Programming in Fragile and Conflict-affected Countries: A learning companion
Governance and Fragility: What we know about effective governance programming in fragile contexts
The following are a series of case studies reflecting Oxfam’s work in different contexts:
Tanzania: Female Food Heroes
Zambia: Vote Health for all
 24 National Influencing Guidelines

The importance of

7 gender in
national influencing

There is compelling evidence that gender is the most significant predictor of poverty and powerlessness and
that gender inequality remains the most pervasive and fundamental obstacle to the eradication of poverty
and the guarantee of human rights for all.
Fundamental to effective influencing and implementation is a clear understanding of the gender-
differentiated reality of poverty by all development actors – NGOs, governments, and global institutions.
Far too often, development policy and influencing has failed to take into account that women and men are
affected differently by poverty. This has further entrenched existing inequalities, minimised the positive
impact of targeted policy efforts to promote gender equality and women’s rights, and prevented global
progress towards other development goals. In short, gender equality and women’s rights are a prerequisite
to the eradication of poverty. The impact of poverty reduction strategies will be limited – and money will
be wasted – if gender equality concerns are not effectively addressed.

There is no one pathway to change towards gender equality; it will always be a complex process and
specific to a given context. Nevertheless, transformative change in gender inequality requires individual
and systemic changes, in informal and formal spheres. The key changes required are in women’s and
men’s consciousness and behaviours, informal cultural norms and exclusionary practices, women’s
access to resources and formal institutions (laws, policies, etc). You cannot only have change in laws and
policies. To ensure laws are implemented, and that economic empowerment opportunities are available to
expand women’s freedom, you need change in attitudes and beliefs that reinforce gender inequality and
harmful cultural norms. In short, changes in one quadrant are often dependent on and require changes in
the others to see transformative change.

The following chart9 is helpful in identifying the changes needed in these domains to bring about gender
equality and the levels at which these changes happen. If Oxfam is to succeed in putting women’s rights at
the heart of all we do, our staff and partners will need to understand a given problem from these perspectives:

Individual change

Women’s and men’s Women’s access

consciousness to resources
Informal

Formal

O
H

U SE H OL
CO
M M U NIT Y
N ATI O N A L
Cultural norms, G LO B AL Formal institutions,
values, practices laws, pracices

Systematic change
 25 National Influencing Guidelines

When developing influencing strategies, an analysis of these issues should form a part of the theory
of change and power analysis process. Specifically, teams and partners should consider the follow-
ing questions: what are the different impacts of a given problem on women and men and on the basis
of their different identities (ethnic, religious, age, etc.)? Why do they experience impacts differently
(including lack of legal rights or access to resources)? What is the nature of the power relations at play?
Beyond this, teams and partners should consider how they can ensure that gender bias and discrimina-
tion is challenged and not reinforced through their influencing work.
The following are examples of approaches to integrating gender justice in our influencing work. They
function best when they co-exist:
• Raising awareness and consciousness of gender justice issues is an important influencing objective
and often the first step in challenging gender power relations and violations of women’s rights.
• We need to engage in interventions that transform the legislation and regulations of institutions (be
they state or private sector) so that they uphold women’s rights and their access to resources.
• Engaging in challenging and changing the cultural norms and practices that exclude women and other
marginalised groups is vital.
This last point is where our national influencing efforts may be able to make the most impact, challeng-
ing harmful norms and practices, enabling women to participate in and influence power structures and
catalysing new and stronger alliances for gender justice and women’s rights. When men and women are
supported to facilitate networks and build movements that ensure women are asserting their collective
political voices, societal and cultural norms which exclude women can be transformed. It’s in these
enabling environments that women are valued and their leadership flourishes in all contexts.
In line with this, we place special value in our relationships with women’s rights organisations, in
particular those that actively support women living in poverty. We aim for our partnerships to be deeply
inclusive of them.

Case study Influencing for women’s rights

In Nigeria, the Raising Her Voice programme interest and faith groups; the engagement
built a national coalition of 17 civil society with different religious and cultural groups,
organisations all working on different women’s which helped to break down fears and
rights issues at different levels across engender dialogue; and the engagement of
the country. It facilitated huge progress new constituencies. The national coalition
in lobbying for a Violence Against Persons linked women (particularly those in poverty,
Prohibition bill. The key factors for success rural, and indigenous women) to decision-
were: the diversity and geographical breadth makers at different levels (both parliamentary,
of the coalition which enabled the programme traditional councils, and different faith groups)
to be implemented across all geo-political and to the media. It fast-tracked national
regions of Nigeria, as well as enabling the lobbying work by collaborating with Pan African
campaign to appeal to a wide variety of regional work on women’s rights.

For more detailed information about integrating gender equality into our influencing work please refer
to Annex 5 (p.38).
 26 National Influencing Guidelines

8 Monitoring, evaluation
and learning (MEL)
9

Effective monitoring and evaluation is an essential part of any influencing work. It allows us to consider
whether our efforts are having the expected results and holds us accountable to our stakeholders.
Crucially, it also enables us to assess the extent to which influencing strategies are contributing to
changes in civil society engagement, public agendas, policy adoption, and policy implementation over
longer periods of time. Undertaking high quality MEL on our influencing work will allow us to demonstrate
impact, learn from best practice as well as from mistakes, identify replicable opportunities and support
our efforts to raise money for influencing work.
The key elements of MEL for influencing work are based on the same principles10 and practice that inform
MEL for Oxfam’s humanitarian and development work. The approach has six main components and is
applicable when thinking about influencing more broadly. The figure below summarises these approaches.
For more informatiuon please refer to Annex 6 (p42)

1.
ARTICULATE
Theory
of Change

6. 2.
communicate IDENTIFY
RESULTS AND INDICATORS
LEARNING

5. 3.
EVALUATE coLLECT
CAMPAIGN DATA

4.
ANALYSE DATA,
REVIEW
PROGRESS

9
See Oxfam’s Campaigns MEL Approach here, along with further tools and guidance
10
See Oxfam’s “Principles for Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning” here
 27 National Influencing Guidelines

9 Risk and
risk management

Engaging in influencing work can create a number of different risks to Oxfam programmes, staff,
beneficiaries, and partners. These risks are not unique to influencing – in fact, most of the risks listed below
are not unlike the ones Oxfam might face merely as a result of its operational presence in a country.
In order to be successful in its influencing work Oxfam must not only identify and pursue opportunities for
change but also be prepared to take risks in order to achieve impact. Campaigning for justice and social
change, advocating for major shifts in the policies and practices of those who hold power, or working in
difficult humanitarian situations is inherently risky for both Oxfam and its partners. The risks of taking
action must also be weighed against the risks to Oxfam and citizens of doing nothing and allowing an
injustice to occur or continue. Good risk management is about making informed judgments quickly,
effectively, and continuously about the opportunities and risks associated with influencing. It is not about
avoiding risks, it is about managing and mitigating risks.11

Noah Friedman-Rudovsky

These guidelines are designed to sit alongside and inform other risk management processes in Oxfam and complement the sign-off procedures in
11 

Oxfam International.
 28 National Influencing Guidelines

Types of risks associated with influencing work

The most common types of risk associated with influencing include:

Direct security risks: Surveillance (communications, physical); damage to Oxfam assets and property;
threats and intimidation; arbitrary detention or prosecution; violent attacks, kidnapping, or killing.
Political risks: Government backlash towards Oxfam and/or partners; restrictions on Oxfam’s ability to
operate and implications for the renewal, or threat of cancellation, of Oxfam’s operating license.
Reputation risks: Hostile media or public reactions; loss of community or institutional income; damage to
Oxfam’s relations with civil society, national, and international NGOs.
Legal risks: Libel (anything that harms or could be seen to harm someone’s reputation); legal action
against Oxfam or partners; compensation claims.
Impact risks: Intervention has little or no impact on the lives of those living in poverty; creation of
unrealistic expectations on the part of staff, beneficiaries, donors, partners or other stakeholders; not
cost-effective; not choosing the right intervention strategy; not creating the right partnership; not being
consistent.
Oxfam teams wanting to carry out any influencing work must ensure that their strategy is based on a
comprehensive analysis of potential risks. This is normally done in the form of a risk assessment or matrix
(see examples in Annex 7 p.46). The matrix should be completed by all those involved in the strategy.
As the examples show, a good risk assessment should contain the following sections:
• What could happen?
• Probability of it happening (high, medium, low).
• Potential impact of the risk (high, low, medium).
• Key stakeholders affected (e.g. staff, beneficiaries, partners).
• Key stakeholders who can influence decisions (e.g. diplomatic community, other INGOs).
• Do the benefits outweigh the likely risks?
• Status:
Green: opportunities outweigh risks, which are not seen as significant. Proceed to run the risk but monitor.
Amber: situation is more balanced, proceed with caution. More rigorous mitigation and monitoring required.
Red: risks far outweigh opportunities. Decide to avoid the risk by not proceeding with particular activity.
• Actions: what actions will be taken to mitigate risks or maximise benefits?
What could happen: List all the scenarios that may arise as a result of Oxfam influencing work. For
example, “the government may revoke Oxfam’s permit to work in the country” or “Oxfam partners may be
threatened or harassed”. This section is often based on a team brainstorm and should include all of the
major fears of team members. This discussion should also reflect on the risks to citizens of taking no
action at all and allowing an injustice to continue or occur.
Probability: Analyse the probability of each scenario (using a simple scale of low, medium, or high), and
cite at least two or three pieces of concrete evidence to explain how you chose that level. This should
include a description of the current climate as well as any past incidents. For example “two other INGOs
have been expelled from the country in the past five years” or “Oxfam has already received two anonymous
threat letters”. Ensure widespread consultation on this section, as different team members and partners
often have different views on the likelihood of each scenario.
 29 National Influencing Guidelines

Potential impact of risk:Consider the repercussions of each scenario, and decide how significant the
impact would be if it were to become a reality (using a simple scale of low, medium, or high). Be aware
of any scenarios with a “high” or “very high” impact, for example any scenario that could lead to serious
injury or death (of Oxfam staff, partners, beneficiaries or others), as these will probably require the most
detailed mitigation strategies.
Key stakeholders who can influence decisions: List all stakeholders who are directly involved in making
decisions that could affect the scenario – for example, national government ministries or representatives,
security forces or other armed groups, local authorities, etc. Be as specific as possible in naming the
person or group who affects decision making.
Stakeholders most affected by risk: List those stakeholders who are most directly affected by the impact
of each scenario – this might include beneficiaries and other INGOs as well as Oxfam staff and partners.
What actions will be taken to mitigate risks or maximise benefit: Describe what actions will be taken
to manage and mitigate the risk posed by each scenario, and who will take them. Actions might reflect
agreed ways of working (such as “Ensure full compliance with national legal requirements”) or tactics
to be taken on a case-by-case basis (“Oxfam identifies lawyer to provide legal advice to communities if
probability rises”.)
Please refer to the following risk management principles which have been discussed across the
confederation in relation to civil society space:
Link to Civil Society Space and Risk Management (OI)
Further principles on roles and responsibilities for risk management across the confederation will
follow later in 2014.
 30 National Influencing Guidelines

Internal mechanisms

10 to facilitate country
influencing

Achieving a “giant leap forward in national influencing” across the countries where Oxfam works will require
changes in the way Oxfam operates at all levels and across our country programmes.
We will need to harness knowledge, skills, and networks in all our programmes; work across functions and
affiliates as a strong and cohesive team and transform our staff to become confident influencers. Below
are suggested approaches to facilitate better ways of integrating influencing into country programmes.

1. Develop a joint country influencing agenda: This will enable the country team to focus Oxfam’s
resources while still drawing on the strengths of the different affiliates and programmes. It will allow
country teams to scan and analyse their entire programme portfolio and ensure that there is: a)
coherence in our strategies and messages (e.g. avoiding instances where one program team calls for
the government to prioritise education in its annual national budget, while another team calls for the
government to prioritise support to small-scale agriculture); b) convergence in our influencing strategies
across programmes (e.g. the humanitarian and development programming teams coming together during
a period of drought to campaign on national level funding for climate change adaptation); c) influencing
work is linked and scaled up with (or lead by) partners; d) local, national, regional, and global linkages are
strategically planned.

2. Clarify roles and responsibilities of teams in the implementation of influencing strategies: Implementing
a country influencing agenda will require the involvement of all Oxfam teams and their corresponding
partners and networks. Influencing is a core part of all our development and humanitarian programmes; as
such it should be included as a performance objective for each programme staff member. Oxfam’s learning
from Latin America suggests that influencing can be successfully integrated into country programmes
when programme coordinators have at least 30 per cent of their time allocated to influencing, along with
the support of a stand-alone campaign coordinator and a media officer. To read more on this learning see
Learning from LAC: WIN in Action.

3. Establish coordination mechanisms: Oxfam is an organisation that works at many different levels;
therefore, working in cross-functional teams will be key to the success of influencing. There are various
ways, depending on context, in which to strengthen coordination across teams and to promote joint
delivery of influencing strategies. These can include thematic and cross-functional teams across the
country, regional, and global level; they can also be cross-functional teams within a country. It’s important
to ensure that these teams have clear leadership and are given sufficient decision-making powers.

4. Strengthen staff capacities for influencing: We need to build a strong understanding of power analysis
across teams; develop facilitating, brokering, and negotiating skills to effectively engage a varied group
of stakeholders including working in consortia or networks; equip staff with skills to undertake advocacy
and campaigning at local and national levels; enhance our capacity on key areas such as research and
social media. We should build capacity to be able to take advantage of critical junctures for change while
enhancing our ability to manage risks. Fundamental to all this is the need to change our ways of working
and internal culture so that all staff understand influencing as a core part of their work.

Visit the national influencing SUMUS page for capacity building resources.
 31 National Influencing Guidelines

11 Digital tools and

technologies

Digital technologies have revolutionised the way we communicate and the way we influence. People in all
parts of the world are rapidly making use of digital communications and sharing real-time information to
assert their right to be heard and to hold duty-bearers to account.
Digital technologies have played a key role in the big movements for change of the last decade: from the
Arab Spring, to Occupy Wall Street, to the mass protests for improved public services in Chile and Brazil.
These technologies open up a wealth of new opportunities to reach and engage people by allowing them
to use the tools they already have at their fingertips to contribute to change. This can involve using digital
technologies to:
• Expose injustice – for example through the documentation and dissemination of evidence, as seen in this
example of election monitoring in Mali.
• Generate crowd-sourced materials – one example of which is Oxfam’s partnership with the band Coldplay
for a user generated video about land-grabs.
• Carry out direct activism – such as, through online petitions and twitter-actions directed at decision-makers.
• Mobilise – mobilising people online to take action.
• Share information.
• Voice ideas and opinions.
• Engage directly with decision makers and duty bearers.
In the new Strategic Plan, Oxfam aims to strengthen our digital influencing work and empower staff around
the world to innovate and experiment with digital technologies across our programmes. To make the most
of the opportunities digital technologies offer, we need to ensure that they are embedded within a wider
influencing strategy and that we are clear on how they can influence change in a given context.
Local context will also play a big part in determining the effectiveness and appropriateness of using
digital technologies. We will need to consider what technology people have access to and what are the
barriers to using that technology (e.g. literacy, electricity, cost, gender-inequality), as well as the cultural
attitudes and individual behaviours that influence uses of digital technologies.
Finally, digital technologies offer a lot of potential for us to increase the impact of our work but they will
require an investment of resources and time if we are to use them to their full potential. An appropriate
and innovative digital approach will only succeed if it is built on a good influencing strategy.

engaging in digital influencing work

Questions we will want to consider when maintain this interest? What are we asking of
engaging in digital influencing work include: the people we are communicating with and how
What are we hoping to achieve by using these can we ensure that we follow up with them?
technologies? Who do we want to communicate What decision makers do we hope to influence
with and why? How can we generate interest from through digital technologies and is it correct to
the audience we want to reach and how can we assume they will be influenced in this way?

Links to online resources to support digital influencing can be found in Annex 8 (p.48).
 32 National Influencing Guidelines

annex 1. PARTNERSHIPS

What is a partnership?
Oxfam’s relationships with other actors are commonly referred to as partnerships. These relationships
vary greatly in scope, depth, maturity, and length. At one end of the spectrum are relationships which
are effectively tactical: ad hoc, short-term, and output-driven. At the other end of the spectrum, the
relationships are strategic in nature: long-term and impact-driven. In order to achieve its mission, Oxfam
establishes relationships across the entire spectrum, depending on the national and programmatic
context, agreed model of change, and specific objectives sought.
Oxfam understands partnerships as mutually empowering relationships, cognizant of power imbalances,
focused on impact, mutual growth, organizational development, and institutional strengthening.12 Oxfam
partnerships commonly include contractual relationships but are nevertheless based on trust. They
evolve through dialogue, shared experience, and a deep commitment to achieving sustained changes
in the lives of vulnerable and marginalised people. Underlying this definition is the notion of partnership
as a perfectible and evolving relationship. It will continue to include providing core support to women’s
rights organisations (WROs) to strengthen organisational capacity and sustainability of new or growing
movements.13
A useful distinction can be made between two broad categories – partners and allies – that both fall
within the partnership continuum:
Partners are autonomous, independent, accountable organisations that share Oxfam’s core values and
agree to work jointly towards common goals under an agreement that ties accountability and performance
to the existing relationship.
Allies are individuals or organisations with whom we work towards a specific goal. Their organisational and
institutional mandates and long-term purpose may be different from Oxfam’s.
These are not mutually exclusive categories, and the nature of the relationship with a particular
organisation may evolve over time or vary across programmes.

This definition is set by the OI Program Standards, Standard 6 (see Annex 1).
12 

Taken from the Oxfam Strategic Plan 2013-2014

13 
 33 National Influencing Guidelines

2. working with civil society

annex and social movements
14

Key Principles
The following key principles should underpin judgements made in a Southern context as to Oxfam’s role
vis-à-vis civil society and social movements:
• Oxfam is an active member of a worldwide civil society constituency for people’s rights. We can and should
directly speak out/act upon international issues.
• Oxfam International members coordinate and tailor-make their roles and influencing agenda at the country
level based on a power analysis and intimate knowledge of what is possible locally. Oxfam will make
continual investment in improving the skills of its staff and partners to do good power analysis.
• Oxfam does not speak for or on behalf of people living in poverty, but we do seek to amplify their voices.
As such, Oxfam encourages and supports organisations that have greater local credibility to speak for
or on behalf of people living in poverty. Moreover, Oxfam is dedicated to stimulating/facilitating people
living in poverty to speak out directly, through traditional media and community-based media (radio, TV,
newspapers), social media and new (mobile and video) technologies.
• In formulating our own goals and roles, Oxfam pays particular attention to the goals of local civil society.
We place high priority on supporting women at all levels to become leaders and take valued roles in
society and the economy. Our goals build on or make reference to other civil society goals, but they need
not be precisely identical, recognising that local civil society’s goals can themselves be diverse and
divergent.
• In all cases, Oxfam is respectful of local civil society, even when our precise views and goals differ.
Therefore, Oxfam will defend the right to organise as a prerequisite for participatory development.
However, in supporting some organisations and promoting some positions but not others, we do
acknowledge that we are making conscious and explicit choices that are grounded in our rights-based
approach.
• Oxfam seeks to strengthen and support local civil society, not displace it. Oxfam uses its brand as a
strategic tool when valued and requested by partners and allies.
• If our power analysis identifies significant gaps in local civil society, Oxfam may play certain roles
otherwise occupied by local civil society, such as direct intervention or direct advocacy. However, this
direct action mode should be subject to review and revision, so as not to hamper the growth of local civil
society.
• Oxfam may be invited by partners to take part in joint campaigning and advocacy work. This may include a
specific and visible role for Oxfam in that collective effort so as to take advantage of the indirect authority
and protection that the Oxfam brand can provide, as well Oxfam’s added value as a global referent on
development able to contribute learning from other countries.
• We need to hire staff in each country who are politically savvy and who can bring added value to each
context.

This information is drawn from “Draft Statement of Principles for Oxfam’s relations with Civil Society”. PDG, June 2012
14 
 34 National Influencing Guidelines

• Oxfam may play roles in linking or idea and agenda generation as added inputs to enhance the
effectiveness of existing or emerging networks. In doing so, we should determine our hand-over and exit
strategy in order to strengthen local civil society.

• Oxfam may help bring together various organisations that might not otherwise work together, such as
academia, government, NGOs, and the private sector. This is a powerful convening function that local
organisations may sometimes find difficult to play for a variety of historical, operational, or tactical
reasons.

• Oxfam can and does play bridging functions between local and international civil society, for the purposes
of information sharing, joint learning, alliance building, standards raising, etc. We also lend a degree of
protection and defence for local civil society in (inter)national forums.

• Oxfam can be a friendly critic of local civil society to the extent that we can bring relevant experience
from our global activities to improve local civil society strategies and tactics. It is appropriate for Oxfam to
critique local civil society constructively if we feel it is not sufficiently grounded in the problems faced by
people living in poverty. We can also assist in increasing its legitimacy.

• Oxfam seeks to stimulate active citizenship. When conditions allow people in poverty to speak for
themselves and act as direct agents of their own change, we reduce the scope and visibility of our roles
accordingly.
 35 National Influencing Guidelines

3. working with
annex governments
15

How Oxfam works with governments

Oxfam recognises that governments vary greatly in how they carry out their responsibilities. Some
governments provide essential services effectively through the apparatus of the state. In other cases,
the state creates an enabling environment in which others (e.g. private sector, people’s organisations,
non-governmental organisations) are empowered and encouraged to provide part or all of such services.
In some governments women play an active role in decision making and power brokerage. At the other end
of the spectrum, some governments simply ignore their responsibilities to vulnerable and marginalised
citizens and exclude women entirely from decision making bodies.

Based on Oxfam’s relevant theory of change in each country context, we employ various approaches to
help us gain better support for people’s rights. For example, Oxfam and its partners may put pressure on
government to fulfil its duties (a demand side approach) or we may seek to improve the capacity of the
state to discharge its responsibilities (a supply side intervention), or both. The political context in each
country strongly conditions how bold we can publicly be in addressing any rights problem.

Key principles
These key principles should underpin judgements made in a Southern context as to Oxfam’s role vis-à-vis
government:
• Oxfam does not get involved in the party politics of government. But Oxfam cares deeply about how those
who are in power relate to people who are vulnerable and marginalised, our constituency.
• Oxfam is particularly interested in working with government in situations where policy or legal change
and/or improved implementation would benefit large numbers of people living in poverty.
• Oxfam’s multiple methods of engaging and/or working directly with government are adjusted according
to local circumstances. Decisions about how to best work with each government are made on a case-by-
case basis, considering local factors.
• Oxfam may provide support to partners working with government, or, in some cases, even directly to
government units themselves.
• While fully supporting government to discharge its rights responsibilities, Oxfam also seeks to maintain a
degree of separation from government in order to preserve the independence of our work.
• Oxfam may play convening roles to assist government to work more effectively with other parties, such as
academia, civil society, people’s organisations, unions, faith-based organisations, and the private sector.
• Oxfam may have a linking function to help national governments engage more productively with regional
and international bodies.
• When Oxfam works on national advocacy efforts directed at government, Oxfam seeks to strengthen our
national-level partners and to give them more prominence.
• Oxfam applies the same high levels of financial accountability for our government partners that it
maintains for our civil society or academic partners.

This information is drawn from “Draft Statement of Principles for Oxfam’s relations with Civil Society”. PDG, June 2012
15 
 36 National Influencing Guidelines

4. Working with the

annex private sector

Choosing an approach – What approach works best when?

There is no single best way to engage business to achieve Oxfam’s objectives. A good approach depends
on the rigour of your theory of change and power analysis, the company, the sector, the issue and the
country-operating context. However, the following guidance summarises Oxfam’s experience of effective
private sector influencing strategies.

Influencing government rules.

This is generally an outsider approach where Oxfam’s strategy is not to engage the private sector directly,
but to engage national governments or regional organisations so as to regulate the private sector. An
example may be work around company disclosure for extractive industries. Extractives transparency
legislation in the US requires that any US-listed company engaged in oil, gas, or mineral extraction
anywhere in the world must report the type and amount of payments made for each project.

In Oxfam’s experience, this approach works well when an issue is generated by an entire sector or industry
rather than a single company; where the playing field and standards of private sector actors is diverse and
where legislation is absent or weak and a regulatory framework is required to protect the rights of poor
and marginalised groups.

Advocacy.
There is an important internal split between insider advocacy (lobby and dialogue) and outside advocacy
(public campaigning). Oxfam’s experience is that insider private sector advocacy works best when a
company has already taken steps to align with Oxfam’s views and shows willingness for change. Oxfam’s
Behind the Brands campaign is a good example of an outsider strategy, whilst dialogue with companies to
improve their policies and participating in multi-stakeholder initiatives are examples of insider strategies.

Similarly, in Oxfam’s experience outsider advocacy works best for sectors/companies that are susceptible
to public or direct consumer pressure (such as companies with well-known consumer brands); where
there is a “righteous grievance” (i.e. where villains/heroes, leaders/laggards or scandals can be easily
identified and communicated) and where internal advocacy and dialogue with the company have not
generated the policy or practice change required.

Partnerships.
Oxfam defines private sector partnerships as one-to-one formal (defined legally), co-branded, long-term
relations between Oxfam and a company. Oxfam’s poverty footprint work with Unilever is a good example of
a policy partnership, whilst supply chain work involving smallholders and investment in microfinance are
good examples of programme partnerships.

In Oxfam’s experience, a private sector partnership works best when the potential impact is larger than
just influencing one company, where there is a clear mutual benefit, a shared long-term objective, where
the company is not only influenced by short-term return on investment targets and when a company
shows willingness to change itself, or join forces to change other actors.

Combined NGO–business initiatives can generate learning and innovation such as the development of pro-
poor business models. Successful partnerships can make Oxfam more powerful in the eyes of the private
sector at large and increase potential impact more broadly.
 37 National Influencing Guidelines

Key principles for private sector interaction16

• Ethics and values. Decisions regarding work with corporations will be based on the ethical principles and
beliefs expressed in the Oxfam International Mission Statement, and the Oxfam International Propositional
Statement on the Private Sector.
• Integrity and reputation. The integrity of Oxfam is vital for the effective pursuit of its mission. Oxfam’s
capacity to speak out with authority and fairness on issues of poverty, distress, suffering, and injustice
should never be compromised by acceptance of funds or other relationships with companies. Where a
relationship with a corporation may affect the reputation or brand of Oxfam, ensuring the capacity to
continue effective advocacy will take primacy.
• Due diligence regarding risks. All Oxfam affiliates will apply due diligence in managing the risks related to
interaction with companies. Risks include those associated with acceptance or refusal of funds, as well
as risks arising from critical advocacy.
• Most effective use of time and money. The opportunity cost of any interaction with the private sector will
be considered in the broadest terms. Assessment will consider if more could be achieved in the long term
if the same amount of energy and resources were directed elsewhere.
• Involvement of affected communities and partners. Appropriate involvement of partners and other
stakeholders should be considered in the negotiation, design, and implementation of any interaction with
companies. It should be assessed if any engagement would be improved if it were done through a more
local organisation, or coalition of organisations rather than Oxfam alone. Where communities or partners
are affected by the activities of a corporation with which Oxfam is considering involvement, these groups
should play a role in defining Oxfam’s engagement and their views should be sought.
• Speaking out for others. On occasions where Oxfam has agreed to express the concerns of an affected
community to a company, the wishes of the community regarding the extent and form of Oxfam’s
interaction with the company should be fully respected.
• Transparency. Regarding its private sector engagement, Oxfam will maintain transparency and clarity
with relevant partners, affected communities, and relevant NGOs and trade unions. Closed-door meetings
with companies should be handled in the same way as interaction with multi-lateral institutions and
governments. There must be clarity about when meetings or comments are on or off the record, ensuring
Oxfam is properly staffed with a note-taker, and that the target company understands that Oxfam may
choose to go public and/or withdraw from negotiations if the company acts in bad faith.
• Legal mandate. The basis for interaction with companies shall be in keeping with the legal mandates of
Oxfam Affiliates and Oxfam International.
• Reasoned and flexible approach. Oxfam does not maintain any prohibited list of companies, but will make
decisions case by case based on the principles outlined in this document.
• Accepting donations. In compliance with the agreed standards for ethical screening, affiliates of Oxfam
International may accept donations from any source, provided that:
- acceptance of the donation does not harm OI’s mission of finding lasting solutions to poverty and injustice;
- acceptance of the donation does not compromise the independence of OI’s advocacy, campaigning or
programme work, or that of our partners;
- acceptance of the donation does not damage OI’s integrity, public image or professional reputation.

Link to Winnie Byanyima discussing Oxfam’s private sector work

These principles are reflected in the “Guide to Working with the Private Sector and Ethical Screening” at https://sumus.oxfam.org/private-sector-team/
16 

documents/guide-working-private-sector-ethical-screening.
 38 National Influencing Guidelines

5. OI gender guidelines on
annex Southern influencing

Oxfam’s approach to gender

In Oxfam’s strategic plan, we have committed to the following objective:

“More poor and marginalized women will claim and advance their rights through the
engagement and leadership of women and their organisations; and violence against
women is significantly less socially-acceptable and prevalent.”

OSP 2013–2019

Our goal is sustained, widespread changes in attitudes and beliefs about gender power relations in
order to further women’s rights and gender justice. Amongst development policy and advocacy actors,
there is now more widespread recognition of “the importance of investing in women” but this has not
always been from a women’s rights perspective. In the hands of some external actors this approach is
too instrumentalist as it supports women as a means to other ends – such as improved child nutrition,
greater farm productivity or increased household income. And it has the unfortunate effect of prompting a
decline in donor funding for programmes focused on women’s rights. Oxfam’s vision for influencing is more
ambitious, putting women’s rights at the heart of all of our influencing work. This requires mainstreaming
women’s rights and gender equality into all influencing work, as well as dedicating capacity and resources
to stand-alone influencing work (in partnership with our women’s rights allies) on women’s rights.
Gender justice is an outcome and a process. As an outcome, it implies access to and control over
resources, combined with agency (the ability to make choices). As a process, it is about promoting
women’s own voices and perspectives. It also brings the additional essential element of accountability
of the social institutions set up to dispense justice. Successfully gender mainstreaming Oxfam’s
influencing work means incorporating women’s rights and gender equality analysis at all stages from
research and policy development to designing advocacy strategies to monitoring and evaluation. This
requires campaign teams to take leadership which consistently keeps women’s rights on their agendas,
and ensures the availability of solid gender analysis and well-defined, evidence-based policy positions,
advocacy and campaign strategies.
We seek transformative change that challenges unequal power.
This type of change:
• is rights based and based on a gendered power analysis;
• aims to transform gender power relations, norms, and structures;
• incorporates an understanding of how multiple identities (gender, age, class, ethnicity, etc.) intersect to
create and sustain discrimination and violence;
• facilitates and supports individual and collective capacity for sustainable change;
• supports women’s own voices and agendas, and seeks men’s backing for them;
• creates an enabling environment for women’s leadership at all levels and domains (family, economic,
political, social).
 39 National Influencing Guidelines

Basic principles to guide the mainstreaming of women’s rights and gender

equality into influencing work:
• Oxfam takes a rights-based, transformative approach to eliminating poverty. Women and girls represent
the majority of those in poverty that Oxfam is trying to reach through its work. This means that policy and
influencing propositions and the strategies to achieve them must recognise and respond to the specific
public policy needs of women and girls. Often times this means innovative or different advocacy tactics
from those Oxfam might typically employ, which must be taken into account during strategy development.
• Gender inequality and the differential impact of poverty on women and men must be addressed up front
during the research and advocacy or influencing development phase.
• Gender analysis and concrete propositions (“asks”) on women’s rights must underpin policy, advocacy,
influencing, and campaigns rather than being added-on as an afterthought;
• Arguments for attention to women in influencing strategies on the basis of pay-offs to other development
goals (economic growth, poverty reduction, health and nutrition, etc.) may be necessary as part of a
broader strategy. However, they should remain secondary to rights-based arguments linked to the
implementation of key international women’s rights agreements;
• Strategic, long-term alliances, based on mutual respect and accountability, should be built with relevant
women’s rights advocates and their organisations and networks on specific policy issues. Effective
alliances offer the potential to strengthen Oxfam’s gender analysis as well as our ability to formulate
gender justice policy propositions, contribute to our allies’ efforts and improve overall results of
transformative advocacy work;
• Building a women’s rights perspective into our influencing work requires dedicated time and resources,
such as budgeting for commissioned research, specialist technical advice, project funding, forging
linkages with women’s rights organisations, and recruiting gender sensitive staff;
• Policy, advocacy, influencing, and campaigns managers must base policy positions on Oxfam’s internal
organisational policies and tools to mainstream gender (the signed-off language in the GJ Policy
Compendium can be used for reference) to ensure policy coherence. This includes policies relating to
performance management.

Key questions to ask when designing and implementing influencing work

A. Identifying and analysing the problem
• Have you identified the problem in terms of the differential impact on women and men, linked to their
different roles, responsibilities, status, and access to resources?
• Have you drawn on gender analysis and research to explore why women and men experience the problem
differently, and considered any specific barriers different groups of women face, including inequalities in
gender power relations?
• How do our country-based, regional, and global partners and allies working on women’s rights and gender
equality understand the problem?
• What types of information and statistics are available on the issue with respect to women and girls?
Where information gaps exist, how can they be filled?
• Have you ensured that TORs for background research papers on the issue included guidelines on
integrating gender?
• What types of gender-specific and sex-disaggregated data are available regarding minority or vulnerable
groups? Have TORs for background research papers on the issue included guidelines on intersectional
analysis to ensure that the specific problems experienced by different groups of women are explored?
• Have you identified whether and how the policies/structures/institutions relevant to this issue treat
women and men differently (for example, women’s legal rights and access to credit, land, tenure, etc.)?
 40 National Influencing Guidelines

B. Defining the change objectives clearly

• What sort of changes do you want to achieve? Have you used the analysis of the differential experiences
and life situations of women and men to help define your objectives? Do your influencing objectives
address the differential experiences and life situations of women and men?
• Will realisation of these objectives benefit women and men appropriately, and specifically promote
women’s rights and empowerment?
• Has a scan been carried out of existing gender policy analysis and policy formulation on the issue,
either from women’s rights organisations or gender researchers in global institutions and public policy
institutes? Are you aware of how they are positioned on a particular issue?
• Have specific influencing propositions (“asks”) for gender equality and women’s rights been articulated on
the basis of the answers to the questions above?

C. Formulating influencing strategies

• For awareness-raising initiatives, how has the strategy considered ways of raising awareness on the
gender-specific issues related to the theme in question?
• For campaigning on specific influencing objectives, what concrete propositions have been identified
about what needs to change to achieve positive outcomes for women?
• Have financial and staff resources been allocated for ensuring that the gender equality objectives in your
advocacy strategy can be implemented?
• Have you considered ways for women and their organisations to be involved in delivering your strategy, as
part of your alliances work?
• How have you ensured that your media work reaches women as well as men, and that issues are
represented in an appropriate manner, which does not reinforce gender-stereotypes?
• What actions do we need to take, and encourage others to take, to address different forms of power
shaping women’s marginalisation and poverty?
• Are there opportunities to strengthen our objectives through linkages with programmes?

D. Undertaking power analysis

• What needs to change in order to achieve the influencing objectives (what laws, policies, practices,
markets, or relationships)? Did you include in your analysis factors/institutions that either re-enforce
gender bias or those that further marginalise women?
• Who are the decision-makers and allies who can help you promote gender equality in relation to this
issue?
• Who are key allies who can help create synergies between the interests and concerns of women’s
organisations, networks, and Oxfam?
• What (and who) are the blockers of women’s rights and the promotion of a gender equality perspective in
relation to this issue (cultural, political, financial, practical)?
 41 National Influencing Guidelines

E. Monitoring and evaluation

• As you monitor the implementation of your strategy, are you specifically considering the differential
positive and negative impacts of progress on men and women, and if so, how?
• Have gender equality outcomes and indicators been included in performance measurement frameworks?

• Do the terms of reference for any evaluation you commission specifically take into account the impact of
your advocacy on men and on women, in terms of both process and impact and if so, how?

• Do teams carrying out monitoring and evaluation exercises include gender expertise? If not, how will you
ensure such expertise will be available?
 42 National Influencing Guidelines

6. Monitoring, evaluation
annex and learning (MEL)
Effective monitoring and evaluation provides important real-time feedback on whether our theories of
change are playing out as expected and helps us to improve the responsiveness and agility of our efforts
to influence change in rapidly changing political contexts. It also enables us to assess the extent to which
influencing strategies are contributing to changes in civil society engagement, public agendas, policy
adoption, and policy implementation over longer periods of time.
The key elements of MEL of influencing work are based on the same principles and practice that inform
MEL of Oxfam’s humanitarian and development work. These include the following six main components:
Step 1: Articulate a theory of change
In order to know if our strategies are working, and take a judgment on the effectiveness of these efforts, it
is important to clearly define how we will know if we are on track, and what success will look like. This will
help you identify the information you will need to manage the programme17 effectively, and the information
you will need to collect to evaluate it.
Step 2: Identify indicators
Once the programme outcomes have been articulated, it is helpful to agree what indicators will show
whether we are on track to deliver these outcomes. Possible indicators might include:
• public statements of influencing targets;
• formal involvement of civil society organisations in policy processes;
• language in legislative documents;
• provincial budget allocation for health.
Step 3: Collect data
For each key outcome, teams should develop a data collection plan, which sets out what, how, when, and who
will gather and analyse information. Where possible the data should be a mix of qualitative and quantitative
information obtained from official sources. Teams should be looking to collect the minimum amount of
information needed to give them a sound understanding of progress, so will need to be selective in deciding
where to invest in tracking and analysing data. Teams should document information on the influencing
activities/outputs (such as numbers involved in mobilisations, media coverage of events) and influencing
outcomes (such as shifts in decision-makers positions, changes in public awareness, and engagement).

Table 1: Example data collection plan

Outcome Indicator/ What data will How will it be When? How will it be
Outcome area be collected? collected? used?

Starting point/baselines:
A baseline is a measurement taken at the starting point of a project, programme, or campaign. It’s a
snapshot before the project gets into action and is a critical first step so that teams have a point of
comparison on which to gauge progress.

The generic term “programme” is used to describe an influencing project, programme, or campaign.
17 
 43 National Influencing Guidelines

Step 4: Analyse data and review progress

Some monitoring data collected will be useful to programme/campaign teams immediately, while other
data will need to be analysed and fed into decision-making processes at particular points in time. These
might include team meetings, periodic check-ins, strategic reviews and after-action reviews. Different
review moments will have a different purpose and focus, see Figure 1. In general, they will focus on whether
the team is on track and whether external developments may have affected the influencing strategy.

Figure 1: using monitoring data

Process Purpose
Cross-functional Real-time updates and tactical planning. Share intelligence, coordinate
project team meetings activities.
After-action reviews/ Team debrief after key influencing moments or events: take stock of
debriefs achievements and failures, discuss team performance, adjust tactics.
Periodic check-ins We suggest that teams set up regular meetings in order to discuss performance
and progress based on monitoring information. These check-ins can be used to:
• review data collected;
•a  ssess what it says about progress towards the agreed influencing outcomes;
• identify challenges, and agree to any adjustments to tactics and strategies
needed.
Strategic reviews Project teams can hold a strategic review meeting twice a year.
Strategic reviews can help to:
• assess progress on outcomes;
• update the power analysis;
• check in on the theory of change and
assumptions underpinning it;
• propose adjustments to theory of change and influencing strategies.
The process should involve key stakeholders, including non-Oxfam
stakeholders wherever possible.
Evaluative studies In order to gain a better understanding of an issue, or a particular success
or failure, teams may want to commission focused evaluative studies. These
might include:
• examining the salience of an issue or policy proposal amongst a target
population;
• measuring audiences’ attitudes or beliefs about an issue;
• documenting changes in the terms of debate.
An overall assessment of the effectiveness and added value of influencing
initiatives/programmes/campaigns should also be carried out (see Step 5
below). These evaluations will help to:
• assess Oxfam’s contribution to outcomes;
• analyse the theory of change;
• provide validation and triangulation (use of multiple sources).
 44 National Influencing Guidelines

Step 5: Evaluate the campaign

To complement team-led data collection and analysis, and to provide an objective view of overall
influencing effectiveness, outcomes, and Oxfam’s added value, we recommend that external evaluation(s)
be carried out at appropriate points. These are usually the middle and/or end point of a multi-year
programme/campaign.

Oxfam’s Policy of Programme Evaluation

• All Oxfam programmes should include a monitoring and evaluation plan. Within the operational plans this
includes the allocation of budgets for evaluation and assignment of affiliate or secretariat responsibility.
• To ensure transparency to Oxfam’s publics, Oxfam will routinely place the executive summary and
management response for all final evaluations of Oxfam programs on their website (www.oxfam.org).
External evaluations, according to the Oxfam evaluation policy, should include focus on:
• determining the degree to which Oxfam programmes are achieving their objectives over time;
• analysing the reasons behind the achievement (or not) of objectives (e.g. if a programme is not achieving
objectives, whether the problem rests in the theory of change or with difficulties in implementation, and
whether these are leading to unintended consequences);
• gauging whether or not the objectives are ultimately contributing to the realisation of Oxfam’s mission;
• identifying Oxfam’s contribution and value-added;
• determining whether the programme is cost effective.
Evaluating the long-term impact in peoples’ lives of an influencing project, programme, or campaign is
usually outside the scope of individual external evaluations. However, external evaluations should test
the validity of the theory of change and assess progress towards agreed goals. This will often require
collecting additional data from external sources to make conclusive analysis.
 45 National Influencing Guidelines

Step 6: Communicating results and strategic learning

Evaluations are opportunities for learning – and how useful an evaluation will be for the team is a key factor
to its quality. Decisions you make before and during an evaluation can affect its (real and perceived) utility
– but use after the fact is also important. Every effort should be made to ensure that the lessons from any
evaluation are communicated, in a useful and digestible format, to as many colleagues as possible.
Oxfam’s Policy of Programme Evaluation requires a “Management Response” that should be circulated
together with the evaluation document itself. The leadership within the project team should meet
to discuss the findings from the evaluation and agree next steps to respond to the evaluation
recommendations: celebrating our achievements and making a commitment in the face of the challenges.
The leadership then develops a plan for communicating learning across the confederation, and discusses
how the evaluation will be shared with external stakeholders. By sharing as widely as possible, we can
help others replicate our successes and learn from our errors so that we can build a strong civil society
movement together. The principles of communicating results and learning from external evaluations
should also be applied to that of internal strategic reviews where possible.
Aspects of influencing work that pose particular measurement challenges
• Economic and social justice is not a yes/no outcome. “Active citizenship” is often a strategy, an outcome,
and the long-term impact we hope to achieve.
• Agenda setting and social movements are usually studied over the span of a decade or more, longer than
a typical project or funding period.
• Partial, lagged, spill over, interaction, and cumulative effects – that is, the outcome may be incomplete,
happen after the final measurement period, with a different group, as a result of the confluence of
multiple factors, or beyond a particular threshold.
• More is not necessarily better – more frequent engagement with policymakers does not necessarily mean
greater influence.
We can address these challenges, in part, by measuring changes in the different phases of the influencing
process. For example:
Civil society engagement – who discusses problems and solutions?
Agenda setting – what issues are discussed and how?
Policy development – what solutions are most appropriate to address the problem?
Policy adoption – is there sufficient support to pass legislation?
Policy implementation – how are the benefits and costs distributed, are there unintended consequences?
 46 National Influencing Guidelines

7. Risk management
(Framework, process, tool,
annex and example)
The following is a template for a risk assessment matrix which can be used by teams when engaging in
risk analysis. On p.47 you can find an example of a completed risk assessment matrix.
Figure 2: A Risk Assessment Matrix

Objective/ Key stake- Key stake- Risk Probabili- Impact Weighting - Status – Actions
Opportunity holders holders scenario – ty – high, – high, are benefits Green;
affected who can what could medium, or medium, or perceived Amber;
influence happen – low18 low19 to outweigh Red20
decisions type of risk likely risks
– yes or no

18
Probability: High = known and expected to happen; Medium = realistically possible; Low = unlikely but possible.
19  
Impact: High = likely to have significant adverse impact on reputation/programme/partners and will require major mitigation/possible avoidance and
active engagement of senior management.
 
Medium = may have adverse impact on reputation at national/international level or on programmes/partners and needs to be actively managed by
relevant managers.

Low = unlikely to impact significantly on reputation/programme/partners and consequences easily reversed but will need to be monitored.
20 
Status:
Green:
If opportunities outweigh risks which are not seen as significant proceed to run the risk but continue to monitor.
Amber:
If more balanced, proceed with caution with rigorous mitigation and monitoring required.
Red:
If risks far outweigh opportunities decide to avoid the risk by not proceeding with particular opportunities or objective.
 47 National Influencing Guidelines

Figure 3: Example: Land grabs campaign in Tanzania

Objective/ Key Key Risk scenario : Prob- Impact: Do Status: Actions

Opportu- stakeholders stakeholders what could happen – abilty: high, benefits Green;
nity affected who can type of risk high, medi- outweigh Amber;
influence medium, um, or likely Red21
decisions or low19 low20 risks?
Yes or No
Oxfam Community Allies Risks to Oxfam: The Medium Medium Yes Amber If the probability increases
publicly members within the GoT twist the findings to low to high develop cross-affiliate
raising affected government of the report strategy to guide its
concerns by land- engagement with the
about the grabbing The GoT focused on pro-
land grabs diplomatic active communication
taking Allies and community with various government
place in partners (embassies, institutions and
Tanzania etc.) individuals.
through Oxfam
publication affiliates in Multi/ Due to vested interest Medium Medium Yes Amber As above.
of a report country bi-lateral in compensation to low to high
Government donors (UN, claims GoT will accuse
of Tanzania EU, WB) Oxfam of being an
(GOT) agent for external
Private actors
World Bank sector
and IFC actors (e.g.
international
corporations
Companies with pre- Pressure on Oxfam Medium Medium Yes Amber Ensure full compliance
involved existing on work permits, to low to high with national
in land relationship dependents passes, requirements. Consult
grabbing with Oxfam) visas for international legal advisor on relevant
staff and visitors, etc. issues. If probability
High profile increases lobby friends
allies of within government,
Oxfam (e.g. influential donors etc. to
celebrities, minimise negative effects.
opinion Oxfam’s social justice/ Medium Medium Yes Amber Pro-actively inform donors
leaders). accountability to low to high of any delays in the agreed
programme targeted implementation plans of
with other ongoing various programmes.
work on land

Senior OGB staff Low High Yes Amber Strict adherence to Security
receive personal Management Plan. OGB CD
threats including, to keep communicating
in the worst case with diplomatic missions,
scenario, death donors and other
threats stakeholders. CD to
immediately communicate
threats/potential threats to
the RD/ID.
In the worst case Low High Yes Amber Build on learning from other
scenario, Oxfam will be similar experiences (e.g.
expelled from Tanzania OGB in Sudan), develop and
implement a cross-affiliate
contingency plan.
Risk to Communities: Low Medium Yes Amber Oxfam identifies lawyer to
Intimidation, bribery, provide legal support for
divisive strategies by communities if probability
GoT and NFC rises. Community
representatives and
Oxfam agree a clear
communication and
coordination mechanism
to monitor and manage
risks on communities.
Depending on the scale of
intimidation, Oxfam will:
(a) pro-actively engage
national media, (b) mobilise
national CSOs (TWAWEZA
and LHRC), international
NGOs and donors, (c) lobby
supporters and allies
within the GoT.
 48 National Influencing Guidelines

8. Links to useful resources

annex and case studies

Title and link Source and date

Civil Society Space and Risk Management - Oxfam International 2013
Collation of documents related to civil society
space and risk management
Communication for Change The communication initiative network, working on
communication for development around the world.
Online resources include case studies.
Frontline SMS Ideas and learning on using mobile phone
technology for influencing
How to do campaigns and advocacy – the essential Oxfam International 2011
online guide
Everything You Always Wanted To Know About Oxfam International, Global Campaigning
Power-Analysis… But Were Too Afraid To Ask Masterclass, 2013
External and Internal case studies Various affiliates from the past five years.
Humanitarian Advocacy Toolkit Oxfam GB, 2010
Power-Analysis – Exploring Power for Change Oxfam Novib, 2013
Power Analysis and Power Mapping Oxfam GB, A presentation prepared for the
Campaigns and Advocacy Leadership Programme
2013/14
A rough guide to power analysis Oxfam GB, 2008
Sign-off handbook Oxfam International, 2008
Tactical Tech Online resource for engaging in digital activism
Using power analysis tools in programme design in Oxfam GB, Right to be heard, 2013
Guatemala
Power-analysis session at Global Campaigning Oxfam International and affiliates, 2013
Masterclass
Working principles on relations with the private Oxfam International 2004
sector