Stories and insights from our alumni community
There are no easy fixes when it comes to piloting frontier technologies to progress on global challenges.
There are, however, lots of difficult questions: How do we best engage local governments to scale ideas? How do we know the technology is suited to the problem we’re trying to solve? How do we build a solution that is sustainable, outside the comfort of grant funding?
With some of these challenges in mind, the Frontier Tech Hub has been exploring ways to surface learnings and insights from those who have been a part of the programme, through two steps:
Undertaking a review of the Frontier Tech Livestreaming programme through analysing information about 30 pilots (experimental projects) from the first five years of the programme, and interviewing different members of the pilot teams – coaches, FCDO pioneers, and implementing partners. Through this, we've identified key enablers and challenges on the journey to scale.
Bringing together the people we’ve worked with across the program to discuss what they’ve learnt and share that with those beginning their Frontier Tech Livestreaming journey. We heard from Alasdair and Ruby from Arribada, along with Phil from FCDO, who are working together on smart geo-seals to track delivery of humanitarian aid; John from Kijenzi, manufacturing for the next frontier, and Pradeep whose pilot tested high tech solutions for supply chain and distribution. They spoke to an audience of 25 FCDO Pioneers, tech partners and coaches from the hub.
Through the review and our session, here are our top insights on the journey to scale, direct from the alumni of the Frontier Tech Livestreaming programme…
Mobilising the right people and the right networks can go a long way in supporting the success of a project:
The FCDO name opened doors and established trust for many pilot teams and allowed them to break into new countries, regions, or spaces which would otherwise not have been possible. Building the right partnerships, putting themselves out there and networking, helped pilots to not only find success in the implementation of their idea but also to expand and pursue other ideas, as well as respond to challenges.
“ …the founder [partner] was great at building relationships and really put himself out there and remained connected to what’s happened on the ground in Kenya. This helped him throughout, even when the pilot pivoted into working on prosthetics. They had partnered with a charity that ran rural hospitals, which meant they got instant access to hospitals to test their idea.”
There's no one way for partners to build a relationship with FCDO, but networks on both sides were incredibly useful in making the initial connection.
“…the legitimacy of the process through the relationship with FT really helped us break in….a lot of distrust hides behind not really wanting to go and do things differently.”
Alasdair (Arribada) connected with Phil (FCDO) via a Shuttleworth Foundation Fellow who introduced Alasdair due to his experience developing tracking technologies, whilst Pradeep's membership of an industry association for the tech industry introduced him to the UK High Commission in India. Whereas the geo-seals idea came from Phil at FCDO, Pradeep was propositional in bringing a problem statement and idea to the High Commission, which led to the Frontier Tech Livestreaming pilot.
This an experience mirrored by other partners on the programme, for whom funding helped get pilots which may have remained 'just an idea' off the ground.
“FT launched us. The funds helped beyond the pilot, and gave us the budget to enter the commercial farming sector...This is very competitive and it’s quite difficult to set up a drone company in Kenya. All the testing we did in the pilot stage helped us gain experience, understand what issues can arise, how to troubleshoot and operate in different conditions, and so on. All of this became our advantage, which other companies in the area didn’t have. ”
Government buy-in matters; lack of political support and bureaucracy can create hurdles:
Excessive bureaucratic processes, slow administrative and regulatory compliance steps, or a lack of government buy-in caused delays for some pilots.
“We faced significant delays due to the bureaucracy in Mozambique – it took a long time to apply for and get ethical approvals, local government permits, and approvals from civil authorities due to our use of UAVs. As a result, we only got everything in place by the end of the year, which was the end of our FT pilot timeline.”
On the other hand, building support and getting local government support enabled pilots to successfully test their ideas, expand to new geographies, and move towards sustainability.
“We had a very clear champion within the government, who really drove the work forward and ensured we piloted the solution well and it was embedded in a real process rather than an abstract idea. Having support from someone within the government was a fantastic opportunity and ensured success.”
With the benefits of government buy-in on their minds, the Arribada team were keen to understand how others have worked with governments to implement their solution on the ground, which is particularly challenging when you are not based in that country. Pradeep suggested working top-down and securing support from higher levels of government to establish credibility which can be drawn upon to keep local governments aligned with the project. To do this, they:
Mapped out the system of relevant government stakeholders by searching through official ministry and departmental websites
Established credibility with top levels of government through a letter sent by the UK high commission and made a strong case for the political value of the program
Used the support of state authorities to write letters to local governments when their support was needed to move the project along
Assigned project managers to work directly with local government officials, to ensure work was progressing.
A key aspect of AsterQuanta’s strategy was working with the existing system and leveraging its top-down structure to overcome bottlenecks. With a similar understanding of Kenya’s political system, John decided to take the opposite approach. Kenya’s political system is largely devolved and so, in that context, it made sense to prove the concept in a few counties and allow those successes to bubble up and gain wider influence.
Agile methodology and adaptability works and needs continued iteration:
The ability to fail fast and adapt was highlighted as key for pilots to learn what works and pursue the right steps to becoming successful. Some partners and pioneers stated they have continued to use this way of working in other aspects of their work beyond the pilot. The methodology was also highlighted as a challenge, particularly in terms of different approaches between pioneer and partner.
Our Sprint Method was inspired by an article in Stanford Social Innovation Review. We define a Sprint as the smallest batch of work we can do that will result in a feedback loop, with each pilot determining their own Sprint cadence - you can read more about our sprint method here. Crucially, our emphasis isn’t on speed, but on learning.
“It’s about being wise enough to know that serendipity and surprise always play a role in innovation and having a method to plan for those surprises and make the most of them.”
This cycle of testing and learning is something that many pilot team members valued, citing both the merits of an ‘always learning’ methodology for innovation in the humanitarian sector and the important role of failure as part of that process.
“You can have lots of generic projects where you go from A to B. Frontier Tech Livestreaming was like a bridge between pure innovation funding and project funding. It allowed us to test our assumptions and fail which isn’t generally encouraged in the humanitarian sector – which was helpful.”
For the FCDO pioneers we work with, this way of working is often unique, and the relationship between ‘evidence’ and ‘action’ is seen as a positive method for testing assumptions and trialling ideas.
“This is a really different way of working for me and I really like it. I like the scientific approach of laying out the problem, thinking through the assumptions, testing each one, adapting from what we’re learning, and so on. It’s evidence-based and offers a lot of clarity.”
There are some conflicting experiences of Sprinting, and some felt that the methodology was too rigid for their specific context. Others have reflected that the emphasis on short Sprint cycles can encourage short-term thinking, which whilst useful for focussing on those small batches of work, risks obscuring a broader or longer-term view.
“We can get really caught up in this ‘sprint by sprint’ thinking and it can almost be restrictive because you only focus on the immediate requirements of the sprint you’re working on, and in doing so lose sight of the long-term things to think about.”
Recommendations for iterating our agile approach include adapting the methodology to the specific needs of the pilot to ensure it is fit for purpose. So not unlike the pilots we fund and support then, there is a need and opportunity for us as programme to iterate and learn also.
What do these insights tell us about how to apply frontier technology to the biggest challenges in development?
Context matters: Depending on the political system present in the country you’re working with, different approaches are going to be effective. Carefully identifying how a political system works on the ground and who its key players are, allows you to focus on key leverage points and build support for your work.
Demonstrating value matters: Often governments need to see some political value to them in the work you're doing. Framing your project as an offer, and not a favour can facilitate this.
Keep testing, keep learning: Cyclically testing small assumptions and solutions, and learning from failures as well as wins as you go, is a good way to iteratively work towards success. However, Sprint goals and cadence should be context-specific and maintaining a longer-term vision of what good looks like is important.