USAID/Lithuania Training Program Review
By Steve Landrigan and Shane McCarthy, with inputs from World Learning
and USAID/Lithuania
U.S. Agency for International Development
Vilnius, Lithuania
May 31, 2000
INTRODUCTION
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has
played a major role in the economic, political and social development
of Lithuania since 1992. The primary goals have been to stimulate the
growth of a free market economy, promote strong democratic institutions,
improve environmental protection, and strengthen the social safety net.
USAID assistance has enhanced Lithuania’s capacity to integrate into
Western political and security structures, develop a healthy economy,
and achieve democratic reforms which rival many Central and Eastern
European countries. Expertise has been provided by various U.S. Governmental
agencies, the private sector, and Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).
Between 1992 and 2000, the United States has provided about $90 million
in technical assistance, training, equipment, and investments.
Initially, USAID’s program of activities was broad-based and designed
to affect many segments of the transforming society. More than 55 projects
were undertaken in ten strategic areas, such us agriculture, environmental
protection, energy, fiscal, financial and others. After a broad-based
program review in 1995, including extensive consultations with Lithuanian
counterparts in the public and private sectors, USAID narrowed its activities
to focus on four priority areas: improving fiscal policy and national
budgeting, developing a more stable financial environment with better
capital markets, strengthening national energy policy and nuclear safety,
and increasing democratization via enhanced citizen participation.
The training program was one of the major parts of the USAID/Lithuania
portfolio. The initial goal of the USAID-funded Lithuanian participant
training program was to cast a wide net of development assistance to
help as much of the country as possible during the early years of independence.
Since 1996, the training program supported each of the priority areas
defined in the USAID Strategy for assistance to Lithuania in 1996-2000.
The training program was implemented by World Learning under a contract
with USAID. USAID has provided more than $5 million for training through
the various training projects. Since 1993, over 1,500 Lithuanian professionals
have had the opportunity to develop their knowledge, skills and attitudes
in their particular areas of expertise, and to increase the capacity
of their organizations by paving the way for indigenous, sustainable
development.
Back to Top
I. Overview - Training for the
New Lithuania
At the heart of USAID’s efforts has been a multi-faceted training program.
The impacts of this program can be readily seen: open hearings in the
Seimas (the Lithuanian parliament); improved legislation for non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), strengthened fiscal policy management; improved
government budgeting procedures; a strong energy regulatory commission;
a better-functioning stock exchange; and more successful small and medium
businesses.
Now, as the USAID team prepares to complete its work in Lithuania,
this report provides a sense of the achievements and a sampling of the
Lithuanians who participated in the USAID programs. This is not a complete
account. Rather, it is a cursory description of those programs that
were most successful, and some lessons learned that may be helpful in
the future.
When USAID first arrived in Lithuania, training programs were made
available to professionals from a broad range of disciplines. Lithuania
had just emerged as an independent nation. Assistance was necessary
in many sectors. These initial training programs were operated under
a USAID mechanism known as the Participant Training Project, and managed
through a consortium of private, non-profit organizations known as Partners
for International Education and Training (PIET). In Central and Eastern
Europe, this program was known as the Participant Training Project for
Europe (PTPE) and was administered by World Learning, a private, non-profit
organization that was a member of the PIET consortium. World Learning,
formerly known as the Experiment in International Living, has been involved
in international education and training for nearly 70 years.
Starting in 1993, World Learning used funds allocated under PTPE to
send 122 mid- and senior-level Lithuanians to training programs in the
United States. Professionals were drawn from a wide range of backgrounds
including agriculture, energy, environment, democratic institutions,
legal and financial sectors, management education, and business development.
The following year, USAID provided funds for a second training program
that was specifically aimed at the small and medium enterprise sector.
It was called the Entrepreneurial Management and Executive Development
(EMED) program. Like PTPE, the EMED program was administered by World
Learning. Over the following three years, it arranged for 107 owners
and senior level managers of Lithuanian small and medium size manufacturing,
processing, and service companies to travel to the United States on
individually arranged internships at companies similar to theirs.
While in the United States, the participants met with representatives
of trade associations, financiers, and representatives from U.S. government
agencies such as the Small Business Administration. After their return
to Lithuania, they participated in various follow-on activities such
as: meetings and seminars in Vilnius with technical experts from other
USAID programs; city and regional EMED reunions which enabled them to
establish valuable support networks with one another; and third country
training in other Eastern European countries where they met newly forming
EMED alumni associations from other parts of Central and Eastern Europe.
In 1996, USAID shifted its emphasis from training individuals to supporting
institutions whose development was crucial to the future of Lithuania.
Examples include the Bank of Lithuania, the Stock Exchange, the Ministry
of Finance, and the Seimas (the Lithuanian parliament). USAID also saw
an urgent need to address environmental matters, and strengthen the
NGO sector.
This new effort which was called Technical Training for Societies in
Transition (TRANSIT-Europe) incorporated many elements of the PTPE and
EMED programs. But it looked for ways to offer training to an even larger
number of people to affect whole institutions, and to cooperate with
USAID’s other assistance in the country. Where possible, groups were
trained. Much of the training took place in Lithuania, or nearby countries,
although some training did continue in the United States. This allowed
training funds to be extended to include more people, especially Lithuanians
who did not speak English. Also, it reflected the growing sophistication
of training organizations within Lithuania and the region.
With the coming of TRANSIT-Europe and USAID’s new management emphasis,
entitled results-orientation, it was possible for USAID to measure more
accurately the impact that training programs were having on the development
of Lithuania.
Running through all of USAID’s training programs is a common theme
of human development. No other foreign assistance program has offered
the kind of trainee-specific internships that were an essential element
of most World Learning programs. What follows is a description of each
of the USAID training programs in Lithuania, highlighting a few institutional
success stories, a discussion of lessons learned from these programs,
and an accounting of the social and institutional legacies that can
be directly attributed to the USAID training efforts in Lithuania.
Back to Top
II. Participant Training Project
for Europe (PTPE)
During its first years in Lithuania, USAID undertook more than 55 projects
in ten strategic areas. Nearly all of these activities were supported
by PTPE training programs designed and implemented by World Learning.
Through these programs, USAID worked with Lithuanian partners to initiate
legal reforms, to improve the protection of human rights, and strengthen
the media. PTPE training also enabled USAID to provide assistance in
drafting the Lithuanian Constitution, work with the Government, political
parties, and the media to increase professionalism in the political
arena, and encouraged public activism in local and national elections.
In addition, PTPE training contributed to USAID’s assistance in the
energy sector, and in establishing improved environmental regulations
and reduced environmental hazards.
In providing oversight management to the PTPE program, USAID would
select focus areas and/or institutions. To attract participants, World
Learning staff placed notices in the press, spoke at professional and
civic meetings, and made appearances on local television programs to
explain how Lithuanians could participate. World Leaning would then
recruit the individuals who would not only benefit from the training
themselves, but also have a measurable impact on Lithuanian development.
During the process, the candidates were required to articulate their
training objectives. Then, with the assistance of World Learning’s team
of professionals based in Washington, D.C., intensive three-to-four
week training programs were designed that linked the participants with
American counterparts thus enabling the trainees to bring back new skills,
knowledge, and fresh perspectives on their work.
A good example of PTPE’s effort to tailor training activities to specific
participant requirements is the program created for Vidmantas Jankauskas,
who participated in training in the United States in 1996 to identify
systems associated with the generation, distribution and regulation
of electricity. The previous systems had been run from Moscow which
directed that a major Soviet nuclear generating plant, Ignalina, be
built on Lithuanian soil. After independence no one in Lithuania had
had experience in dealing with power as a commodity in a free market
economy. Equally important, as energy had been totally subsidized, its
price not reflecting real costs, Lithuanians were unsure as to how electricity
was regulated or priced.
In Washington, Mr. Jankauskas met with members of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at a time when the Commission was conducting a
major restructuring of its own existing regulations to encourage competition
among power companies. Thus, Mr. Jankauskas had an extraordinary opportunity
to see first-hand how a national power regulatory agency grapples with
fundamental issues, many the same as those being faced by Lithuania.
He then traveled to San Francisco, spending a week with the California
Public Utilities Commission, one of the most innovative state-level
power regulators. While there, Mr. Jankauskas attended a public hearing
called to determine whether a local power generating company had been
negligent for taking up to a week’s time to restore power to certain
communities after a bad storm. The company was fined a half million
dollars because it had kept its customers inadequately informed about
the efforts being made to restore the cut-off energy. It was through
this experience that Mr. Jankauskas realized the importance of a public
utility’s accountability to the people it is serving.
Shortly after his return to Lithuania, Mr. Jankauskas was appointed
Chairman of the National Control Commission for Energy Prices and Energy
Activities, a five-member board created by presidential decree in February
1997. This appointment no doubt was, at the very least, influenced by
Mr. Jankauskas’ PTPE training. As Chairman, Mr. Jankauskas now has direct
oversight in the regulation of electricity prices in Lithuania.
Another example of the impact of PTPE training can be found in the
economic area. After the banking crisis of 1995, USAID helped the government
and Central Bank of Lithuania improve its supervision of the banking
system. On-the-job-training, using international measurement techniques,
was provided to inspectors of the Credit Institutions Supervision Department.
Gitanas Nauseda, Director of Monetary Policy of the Bank of Lithuania
returned from US training with a methodology and techniques which were
introduced to foresee financial crises through the use of early warning
indicators. This PTPE training helped raise the standards of bank operations,
and contributed immeasurably to the rebuilding of public confidence
in the Lithuanian banking system.
Back to Top
III. Entrepreneurial Management
and Executive Development Program (EMED)
When USAID began the EMED program in Lithuania in 1994, World Learning
staff canvassed the country to find entrepreneurs with small and medium
businesses who would benefit from meeting with counterparts in the United
States. Through an open and carefully targeted selection process, entrepreneurs
were identified for an EMED program that would enable the trainees to
improve their business operations, discover new ideas that could lead
to expansion, and develop lasting and valuable contacts with American
leaders in their fields. Some EMED trainees found buyers for their products;
others found partners for their companies.
One EMED participant, a woman who is the marketing director of a linen
products manufacturer, returned with an initial $200,000 sales contract.
The proprietor of the first private building management company with
oversight responsibility for hundreds of buildings in Lithuania, attributes
many of his business ideas to his United States internship. A fashion
designer returned from the US with the skills and confidence to renegotiate
a contract with a retailer who had previously been earning a 300 percent
mark-up on her designs.
The proprietors of several popular restaurants and nightclubs, including
Naktinis Vilkas in Vilnius, Skandalas in Klaipeda, and the Pizza Jazz
chain in Kaunas, all developed the idea of "concept" restaurants while
EMED participants. Another participant came back with ideas which grew
out of his visits to American supermarkets: preservatives in packaged
salads to extend their shelf life and ice-cube making machines. His
profits tripled the next two years.
EMED participants were usually owners or senior level managers from
a wide range of businesses such as entertainment, food processing, light
manufacturing, wood processing, cosmetics, lasers, cement, travel, advertising,
marketing, and fashion. They were required to submit detailed strategic
plans for their companies before they traveled so that their internship
time would directed at addressing specific issues having a direct bearing
on their company’s profitability.
The EMED program further required participants to have been in business
for at least a year, have five or more employees, and be able to speak
English fluently. By design, EMED trainees were selected from all parts
of Lithuania, not only Vilnius. Also, some 23 per cent of them were
women. This was at a time when the percentage of women in business in
Lithuania was half that number. World Learning actively sought and identified
women who typically were hesitant about submitting applications.
The most positive and concrete effect of the EMED program was in the
profitability of a large cross section of companies. Within two years
of the visits to the United States, 45 percent of the effected companies
reported that assets had increased, generally in the range of 30 percent
to 200 percent. Even more encouraging was the fact that 63 percent of
the companies increased their profits from 10 percent to 40 percent
through the EMED participants’ newly acquired knowledge of marketing.
Job creation was also reported, with more than 50 percent of the returned
participants hiring new employees. On the average, three jobs were created
per company, with an overall increase in the workforce of 15 percent
within one year of the visits to the United States. One dramatic result
of the EMED program was reflected in a participant, who upon his return
from the US, hired 200 new employees to begin production of a new product
line and improve his company’s packaging.
As with PTPE, EMED training programs in the United States lasted about
a month and took participants to several cities. Generally, they would
meet with executives with whom they could discuss operations, personnel
planning, marketing, or the know-how to produce a new product. Some
of the executives whom participants met were Lithuanian-Americans. A
number of enduring personal relationships developed during these programs
that have led to ongoing business contacts between the training participants
and their hosts. A distinct element of the EMED program was the provision
of financial support and encouragement that enabled many participants
to join American trade organizations, thus increasing the opportunity
for on-going contacts.
For nearly all the participants, EMED training represented a first
time visit to the United States. Mr. Gintaras Gavenas, for example,
a former biochemist, founded the BIOK cosmetics company in 1990. Although
he had never been in business before, Mr. Gavenas sensed there was a
market for a high-quality, low-cost facial cream that was made entirely
from natural substances. He felt this would appeal to Lithuanians who
have a long tradition of using herbs as health aids, and who have high
standards for purity in health care products.
His instincts were correct. His sales were strong from the start. He
quickly introduced other products to compete with a flood of foreign
imports. His business was growing so quickly, however, that he found
it difficult to manage. EMED was a perfect opportunity to experience
a developed cosmetics industry in a highly competitive market.
In the United States, Mr. Gavenas visited several American cosmetic
companies in order to learn how to set up a more effective marketing
and distribution system in Lithuania. He also attended a cosmetics trade
show that gave him new ideas on packaging and products. He came back
understanding that he had to take more risks in product development,
and that he would benefit from having expert help in designing a new
marketing strategy.
Mr. Gavenas formed the Lithuanian Cosmetics Association to promote
the collective interests of cosmetics producers and distributors. Through
the Association, new ideas to which he was exposed during his EMED program
are being passed on to others.
Back to Top
IV. TRANSIT-Europe
TRANSIT-Europe began in 1997, marking a profound shift in USAID’s programming
approach from training individuals to impacting institutions through
a focus on specific objectives. More training was held for groups, and
much more of it was done in Lithuania. USAID training opportunities
became available to many Lithuanians who previously had been unable
to participate because they did not speak English or their jobs were
too specialized. Approximately 1,200 professionals participated in training
programs that took place primarily in Lithuania and neighboring countries
while some TRANSIT-Europe participants did travel to the United States.
TRANSIT-Europe took advantage of the rapid developments taking place
all across Central and Eastern Europe. It had become possible for Lithuanians
to learn from counterparts in countries like Hungary, Poland, and the
Czech Republic. By the same token, Lithuania hosted training participants
from Bosnia, Montenegro and Croatia.
Such so-called "third country" training (that is, training that is
held neither in the United States or Lithuania) had an important secondary
effect of helping different country leaders get acquainted with one
another and their experiences. As borders in Western Europe are disappearing,
those further east are being eased by such citizen diplomacy. Also,
in third country training, participants from former command economies
can share experiences that experts from other countries can never fully
understand.
Back to Top
V. Success Stories from TRANSIT-Europe
USAID’s TRANSIT-Europe training programs were designed to help participants
achieve results in primarily one of four areas: strengthening fiscal
management, stabilizing the financial sector, improving the safety and
the policy of the energy sector, and strengthening the NGO sector. Of
the programs that came from TRANSIT-Europe, many already had demonstrable,
positive impacts. This report focuses on three such "success stories,"
each of which is discussed below.
Back to Top
- Economic Restructuring Discussion Series
Few members of the Seimas had had much exposure to democratic government
prior to Lithuanian independence. Frequently they were asked to vote
on laws that demanded a familiarity with complex economic concepts to
make good economic decisions for the country.
A team from USAID and World Learning conducted an in-depth needs analysis
to determine what kinds of information would be of most use to Seimas
members. They met with most of the Vice-Chairpersons of the Seimas,
and with the leadership of the committees responsible for economic matters.
A plan was developed to hold a series of high-level, informational seminars
that would offer Seimas members grounding in economic issues.
Vice Chairman Feliksas Palubinskas proposed that the Seimas should
help both to defray the cost of the series and to organize some of the
discussions. A former professor of marketing at Purdue University before
he returned to his native Lithuania 10 years ago and entered politics,
Dr. Palubinskas felt such discussions would prove extremely helpful.
Another professor, Kestutis Glaveckas, who is the Vice Chairman of the
Seimas Budget and Finance Committee as well as teaching at Vilnius University,
agreed to lead the discussions.
As the series of discussions took shape, USAID contributed the services
of many American experts then in Lithuania on other USAID projects.
In addition, TRANSIT-Europe funds were used to bring in experts from
the United States. Other international development organizations such
as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, as well as the
governments of Denmark and Canada followed suit. Adding a local perspective,
several Lithuanians made presentations, introducing lawmakers to local
experts who could be invited to join future fact-finding and law-making
working groups and committees.
Participating in addition to Seimas members were staff from the various
ministries, especially the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of the
Economy. The discussions lasted three hours each. The first two hours
generally were given to the formal presentations, with the third hour
left open to questions. The presenters were encouraged to provide background
materials, which, translated into Lithuanian and copied, were made available
to the attendees. Frequently, these materials provided information which
had not been available previously in Lithuania.
The first Discussion attracted about 30 participants. By the last,
the number had swelled to 90. Topics covered included taxation, energy
sector restructuring and pricing reform, banking, budget reform, institutional
investors, economic crises and vulnerability, the limits of indebtedness,
and strategic planning.
In the few weeks since the strategic planning Discussion, there have
been many calls for its repetition. The idea of strategic planning had
previously been tainted with past encounters with Soviet-style five
year plans dictated from the top down and with no opportunity for dialogue.
The Discussion on strategic planning offered alternative views and methodological
ways of implementing this new concept.
Vytautas Landsbergis, the Chairman of the Seimas, noted in a letter
to World Learning that "your subject matter is accurately chosen to
be of practical and current interest and an effective method for our
Seimas to be exposed to high level economic concepts provided by experts
from all over the world." He went on to say that programs like the Discussion
Series "provided needed information and insights for our decision makers."
Back to Top
- Program on Open Legislative Process
As the Economic Restructuring Discussion Series progressed, it became
evident that open discussions and more exchange of information were
needed, not only within the Seimas, but also between the Seimas, public
institutions, and the public. Working with USAID, the Seimas leadership
decided to encourage parliamentary committees to conduct open hearings
on pending legislation. This presented a problem though, as no formal,
established mechanism existed for such hearings. The Seimas then embarked
on a pioneering effort first to create the legal framework needed to
allow open hearings by amending its operational statutes, and then to
actually hold one.
In response to this initiative by the Seimas, USAID set about developing
what was to be the most comprehensive training program of its kind in
Lithuania to that time. All parties that were to participate in the
open hearing Seimas members, their staff, expert witnesses, and eventhe
media would be offered training on how the hearing would work and what
they were expected to do.
Several pending draft laws were considered as a subject for the hearing.
A decision was taken to address the Law on Charity and Sponsorship.
As it happened, USAID was just then engaged in another project aimed
at strengthening the NGO sector. If NGOs were going to be able to increase
their effectiveness in Lithuania, then amendments had to be made to
the Law on Charity and Sponsorship. Several amendments had been proposed
some months before. They were then at a stage where an open hearing
could prove genuinely useful. As these amendments were the responsibility
of two separate committees, the open hearing would be jointly held by
both. This made the process more complex, but it had the benefit of
involving a greater number of Seimas members, and thus possibly moving
the idea of open hearings closer to being institutionalized.
One of the factors that contributed both to the Seimas’ undertaking
the open hearing, and the decision to discuss the Law on Charity and
Sponsorship, was that in the months just previous, a group studying
NGO Development had received USAID-sponsored training in the United
States. Vilija Blinkeviciute, Vice Minister for Social Security and
Labor, whose portfolio includes NGO matters, was also the chairperson
of the working group of the draft Law of Charity and Sponsorship, and
part of the training group. Ms. Blinkeviciute now admits that before
her trip she had very little understanding of what NGOs are or what
they can do. During the Communist era, NGOs officially did not exist,
as all services were theoretically provided by the state. So, apart
from a handful of long-established groups which offered assistance to
the handicapped, NGOs had a very low profile in Lithuania.
Ms. Blinkeviciute recently recalled the excitement she felt on that
trip when she encountered volunteerism for the first time. She met a
woman at a museum in Tucson, Arizona, who was working as a volunteer.
The woman said she considered it a privilege to serve her community
by contributing time to the museum. Ms. Blinkeviciute said she was stunned
by the woman’s sense of commitment to her community. That encounter,
she said, opened her eyes to the impact that this type of volunteer
spirit could have on non-profit, non-governmental organizations.
As she and her colleagues continued their TRANSIT-Europe-sponsored
program, they were amazed at the way United States’ NGOs worked closely
with state and municipal governments, often doing things better and
more efficiently than the authorities could. They learned about such
practices as deducting contributions to non-profit organizations from
taxable personal income. Equally important, Ms. Blinkeviciute said,
the participants had time to talk with one another at great length about
how what they were seeing could benefit Lithuania. At the same time,
they also recognized that in order to foster a vibrant NGO sector, amendments
needed to be made to the Law on Charity and Sponsorship.
Having returned to Lithuania and in preparing for the open hearing,
a number of questions arose. How should the hearing room be set up?
Where do the respective parties sit? Should witnesses testify from a
podium or a table? What arrangements should be made for staff such as
stenographers or simultaneous translators? Where should the media be
placed? Each of these questions generated considerable discussion. Interestingly,
it was a news photo of an open hearing in Washington D.C. that served
as a touchstone. It laid out clearly and visually how the United States
House of Representatives conducted its open hearings. The Lithuanian
organizers stated their determination to do things in the American way
and as a consequence, the guidelines drafted for the conduct of the
open hearing process in Lithuania were based on the rules of the United
States House of Representatives.
The intention to hold an open hearing was announced in the media and
in specialized bulletins and magazine publications serving NGOs. Several
dozen individuals active in NGOs indicated an interest in testifying.
World Learning retained the Lithuanian NGO Information and Support Centre
to conduct a series of sessions to explain how the hearing would be
organized.
Meanwhile, similar training was being conducted for members of the
two Seimas committees that were holding the hearing, the Budget and
Finance Committee and the Social Affairs and Labor Committee. World
Learning hired a specialist on legislative procedures from the Congressional
Research Service, Paul Rundquist, who came from Washington to guide
Seimas members through the process of preparing an agenda and dealing
with protocol issues. In addition, USAID Project Manager Mark Segal
provided a collection of informative articles and drafted a set of procedures,
both critically instrumental to the success of the undertaking.
Since this was, in fact, the first formal open hearing ever to be held
in Lithuania, it was decided that a special seminar should be presented
to a plenary session of the entire Seimas on the morning of the hearing.
In the seminar, Mr. Rundquist and Edward Rekosh, the Director of the
Public Interest Law Initiative in Transitional Societies at Columbia
University Law School, spoke about the benefits of open legislative
processes in general.
This seminar set the stage for the plenary session that was chaired
by Andrius Kubilius, then the First Vice Chairman of the Seimas, presently
the Prime Minister. It was attended by Vytautas Landsbergis, the Chairman
of the Seimas, who opened the event, and Don Pressley, USAID’s Assistant
Administrator for Europe and Eurasia, who gave a keynote address. The
lead witness was Ms. Blinkeviciute. She was joined by others from government,
including the Director of the NGO Information and Support Center, and
six other NGOs whose activities ranged from working with the mentally
handicapped to promoting the performing arts and small business.
The open hearing went smoothly and a few weeks thereafter, the Seimas
voted to implement the proposed changes in its statutes, authorizing
the regular use of open hearings at the committee level, and increased
public access to all Seimas deliberations. This followed an earlier
decision to publish all laws introduced in the Seimas on the Internet,
along with information as to their current status. Also, setting an
important precedent, all transcripts of the proceedings of the open
hearing were published, both in print and on the Internet.
Back to Top
- Capacity Building Component
When Lithuania gained its independence, its Ministry of Finance was
forced to undertake a dramatic facelift, from merely accounting for
funds allocated by Moscow to having to develop sound fiscal policies
and careful budget management. Staff veterans had had no experience
dealing with such concepts and new staff found themselves caught between
those wanting to do things the old way and the lack of clearly developed
policies to do things differently.
Consequently staff turnover was high. It reached 80 percent per year
in some departments, and more than 100 percent over three years in others.
Several Ministers of Finance came and went. Each time a staff member
left, they took with them what they had learned. It was clear that some
kind of training mechanism was needed to provide the few remaining long-term
and the new employees with essential technical and operational knowledge,
as well as basic knowledge of the free market system.
The Ministry understood that it had a challenge and was looking for
solutions. USAID had been providing training in the United States for
Ministry managers since 1993. Together with USAID, World Learning conducted
a needs assessment with Ministry officials. A plan was developed that
emphasized in-country training. This led to a management seminar for
senior managers, and ultimately to courses for other staff members on
macroeconomics and public finance. Professionals from many different
departments and levels of management participated.
One of the local trainers, Rimantas Vaicenavicius, Director of the
Ministry’s Fiscal Policy Department, recommended that the courses be
repeated. They were and three other subjects were introduced as well.
While this was taking place, USAID sought to institutionalize within
the Ministry of Finance a "Capacity Building Component" which would
serve as a home base for all of the Ministry’s future training efforts.
As a first step, World Learning conducted an institutional assessment
which identified the Ministry’s own training center as the organization
having the greatest potential for meeting the Ministry’s future training
requirements. The Center had been created as a semi-autonomous entity
by the Ministry solely for the purpose of training tax inspectors. Happily,
the Training Center’s Director, Eugenijus Chlivickas, welcomed the opportunity
of expanding its mandate.
Four working groups were assembled to create a curriculum and a set
of materials for each course. Led by a local technical expert, each
of the working groups were comprised almost entirely of staff from the
Ministry. Hence, from the beginning, the element of sustainability was
being built in.
USAID, World Learning, the Ministry of Finance, and the Director of
the Training Center signed a Memorandum of Understanding that gave impetus
to the project. Both the Ministry of Finance and the Training Center
appointed staff to coordinate all aspects of the training. Team building
sessions were held and the members of the working groups then undertook
training that prepared them to serve as trainers for four courses: treasury
and debt management, fiscal policy, budget management, and an orientation
to the Ministry of Finance for new employees.
The response among participants was immediate and positive. The courses
helped them establish a common language which in turn fostered a common
culture within the Ministry as participants in the courses got to know
their fellow employees better. Not only did this lead to a more positive
working environment, but it also gave staff useful insights into the
workings of other offices outside their immediate area, as well as a
better understanding of the principles of open market economy.
A logical follow-on to the development of these courses was the Capacity
Building Component’s efforts to strengthen the ability of the Training
Center to maintain this training momentum. Through targeted training
efforts, the Center was assisted in team building, and developing a
sustainability plan, a strategic plan, and a work plan for the coming
year. This emphasis on planning had not occurred in the past. The Training
Center’s management embraced it.
Already, the materials for the treasury and debt management courses,
in addition to the fiscal policy course, have been posted on the Internet.
Further, World Learning helped the Training Center prepare both a brochure
and a web site that will assist the Center’s ability to market its services.
Back to Top
VI. Lessons Learned
The USAID program in Lithuania evolved as the political and economic
situation in the country changed. The program was structured with the
flexibility to reshape the training programs as needed, and to take
risks in areas where no one could be certain of success. This sensitivity
to changing needs and a determination to reach the respective goals
of each training activity were prime elements in the program’s success.
From this has emerged the realization that several aspects of its work
turned out better than might have been expected. At the same time, there
were others which, in retrospect, might have been done differently.
Several of these are worth mentioning, as they may offer some useful
guidance to Lithuania and in other countries of the Eurasia Region where
USAID is supporting or contemplating support of training programs.
- Information Sharing - Training had the greatest impact
when participants from different training programs came together upon
their return to discuss what they had learned and how they were using
it. Building on this same concept, training groupings should be strategically
selected to reflect a multi-disciplinary mix. This enables trainees
to feed off each other’s insights, while providing greater opportunities
for creating environmental receptivity for change once the trainees
return home.
- Goal Setting - The success of individual training
programs was nearly always in direct proportion to the participant’s
having both specific objectives, and action plans for achieving those
objectives. Beyond training itself, this approach has shown itself
useful when separate parties develop a memorandum of understanding
that clearly outlines what they expect to achieve together, and the
steps they will take to do so.
- Ministry-Specific Training Centers – Government training
centers should – at least in their inception – be ministry-specific.
Too often USAID has supported government-wide training centers which
inevitably are undermined by their own lack of demonstrated success
due to a lack of focus, both in terms of management and training events
offered.
- Rural Outreach – Training programs should make a
deliberate effort to reach beyond the capital city to insure that
other parts of the country are served. People in small towns and rural
areas very often get overlooked when training programs are being developed.
Yet they have a point of view that may well enhance what is being
undertaken.
- Month-Long Training - Four week targeted training
events are not only cost effective, they work. Long term training
(under graduate and post graduate training) is appropriate only where
there is an absence of suitable host country higher educational facilities.
- Tapping Local/Regional Expertise - Like most countries
in the Europe and Eurasia Region, Lithuania possesses highly qualified
professionals who are capable of performing many functions which foreign
experts have been engaged to do. Also, local experts frequently have
answers to questions that are more in tune with host country realities.
Further, experts from other Eastern European countries have useful
skills and information to share. Engaging them helps develop links
between local professionals and their counterparts in nearby countries.
- Training in the United States - While in-country
training is obviously more cost effective, short-term, US-based training
goes beyond the specific information being presented to the participant.
Being exposed to the full range of American life offers participants
a context for everything else that is learned and helps them, through
seeing different organizational options at work, form a vision of
how institutions can be organized in a participant’s home country.
In brief, US-based training has certain value-laden overlays that
simply cannot be replicated in-country. A proper and strategic mix
is best.
- Creating a Volunteer Mindset - Leaders in former
Soviet countries look upon voluntarism as something that can be done
in leisure time in developed societies. Hence, for starters, they
often rejected the concept and value of NGOs in transitional societies.
The fact is, in the United States, the most significantly involved
volunteers, are among our most busy citizens who use their positions
of influence to be change-agents for various causes. The "lady bountiful"
volunteerism of days past, while it still exists, is not the spirit
that is critical to effective engagement in an open and transparent
transitional society. Creating a legal environment conducive to NGO
growth is a necessary first-step for formally establishing NGOs, whose
institutionalization then can be further assured by appropriate in-country
training.
- Cooperation with other USAID Programs - Overall impact
of training was also greatly enhanced when the participant selection
and scope of training was coordinated with other USAID assistance
programs. An early example of this coordination was training of dairy
specialists under EMED that was coordinated with the Land O' Lakes
Dairy Improvement Project. The Land O' Lakes advisors assisted with
in-country training and coordinated with World Learning to arrange
U.S. training visits under EMED for key personnel. In another example,
Bechtel, who assisted the National Control Commission on Energy Pricing
under the Energy Regulatory and Restructuring Project, worked with
World Learning to identify Commission staff to be trained under the
TRANSIT program. Bechtel staff helped develop a specific U.S. training
program for these participants. The results included increased focus
of the training and greater impact within the firm or government organization
receiving the training.
Back to Top
VII. USAID Training Program Legacies
The full impact of training programs is always difficult to assess.
Many times, ideas planted during training do not flourish until years
afterwards. Also, skills in leadership and decision making that may
have been enhanced by training usually show themselves only on the long
term.
Nonetheless, as the USAID presence in Lithuania comes to an end, there
are four creations, spawned by the training programs described above,
that are not only successful in themselves, but are likely to continue
into the future. Three are institutional; one is social. They will serve
as a visible, vibrant legacy of the USAID program in Lithuania. The
institutional legacies will be described first.
Back to Top
- The Lithuanian American Business Initiative
(LABI)
After participants in the EMED program returned to Lithuania, they
found that they welcomed being in contact with other participants including
those from PTPE. So many of the new ideas to which they had been exposed
in the United States were difficult to share with those who had never
been there. But among the returned participants there was a common experience
that for many had been a transforming one. Also, the participants came
home convinced that certain laws needed to be changed if Lithuania was
to prosper. They felt that if they joined together, they might be able
to impact the political process. Hence, the Lithuanian American Business
Initiative (LABI) was created.
From the start, LABI was a Lithuanian initiative. Through World Learning,
USAID provided support, primarily by helping the participants few of
whom knew one another establish contact. But it was from Lithuanians
that the idea sprung. The returned EMED participants opened up LABI
to returned PTPE and TRANSIT-Europe participants, as well as those from
other non-USAID programs. What has been created is a remarkably diverse
group of some of the most dynamic executives and decision-makers, most
of them young, all of whom are committed to the future of Lithuania.
"American experience for the success of Lithuanian business" is LABI’s
mission statement.
The two themes guiding LABI in planning its activities is that they
should be useful and fun. LABI meets four times a year. Gatherings are
usually held at tourist retreats, sometimes at resorts owned by LABI
members. The idea is to get away from the pressures of their professions.
Members bring their families. Their children have come to know one another.
Further, they purposely meet in a different part of the country each
time so that they can get to know the business, social, and cultural
environments in various Lithuanian regions. Usually, a formal presentation
is made by one of the members or an invited expert on topics related
to business. But the seminars and brainstorming sessions are balanced
with canoe trips and hikes through the country. There are often field
visits to a local business or cultural event.
Perhaps most importantly, during this time of national transition,
LABI members have come to view each other as people who can be trusted,
whose goals are shared. That, says one member, more than anything else
has bound the organization together and will carry them into the future.
Back to Top
- Sustaining Training for the Ministry of Finance
At the core of the success of the four courses that were developed
for the Ministry of Finance staff were the 30 Lithuanians who actually
conducted the training. These trainers are now poised to carry on without
outside assistance, having created a curriculum by drawing information
from text books and articles given to them by American advisors and
adapting this input to Lithuanian requirements. In addition, they drafted
a training manual that will serve as an invaluable tool for future generations
of trainers. Combined with the institutional strengthening of the Ministry
of Finance Training Center, these trainers have the capacity to use
the current courses as a cornerstone for a broad range of other courses
in the future.
The Ministry of Finance now recognizes that these courses are essential
to their employees. They are committed to providing capital to cover
the Training Center’s operating expenses through an annual fee drawn
from the Ministry.
Back to Top
As part of the attempt to involve host country professionals in its
training programs, several local training providers developed institutional
strengths in the process. They have also become familiar with USAID
procedures. Even though USAID is leaving Lithuania, these organizations
stand prepared to assist the ongoing USAID development efforts elsewhere
in Europe and Eurasia. These local training providers include: the Ministry
of Finance Training Center; the Center for Organizational Development;
the Lithuanian Banking, Finance, and Insurance Institute; the NGO Information
and Support Center; the Lithuanian Journalism Center; the Lithuanian
Judicial Training Center; the International Business Network; and the
Management Training Center of the University of Kaunas.
With or without the hand of USAID to guide them, these organizations
are prepared to disseminate the knowledge gained during their years
of association with the USAID training program.
Back to Top
The social legacy builds on the fact that USAID actively promotes
the inclusion of women in its projects around the world. The USAID training
team in Lithuania considers the large number of women it has trained
to be one of its major achievements. This has unharnessed a tremendous
force whose effect will be felt for years.
The percentage of women who participated in the various USAID-sponsored
training programs increased significantly over the years. While only
23 percent of the participants in the EMED Program were women, this
almost doubled to 43 percent under the TRANSIT-Europe Program. During
this period, the opportunities available to women in Lithuania also
increased. For instance, banks are now more willing to lend to women.
Consequently, there are more women-owned and managed businesses in Lithuania.
Even more dramatically, training with a woman-focus has supported the
growth of the NGOs in Lithuania, a sector that is managed predominantly
by women. All have benefited from USAID’s technical support work on
amending the Law on Charity and Sponsorship. More specifically, many
women have participated in training directed at NGO capacity building.
Dramatizing the immediate impact associated with the training of women,
USAID brought together women who had participated in the EMED program
from all across Eastern Europe at a special conference in Hungary. There
they exchanged their experiences, identified common problems, and drew
from each other’s energies and vision.
Back to Top
VIII. Conclusion
Because a large number of Lithuanians received training through the
various training programs described above, a critical mass of professionals
has been created. They have been exposed to the essential ideas of open
democracy. Due to their numbers and their level of commitment to supporting
Lithuania in its transition to a free market society, these participants
are able to both implement and sustain the skills and ideals espoused
through the eight year collaborative relationship involving development
partners, USAID/Lithuania and World Learning.
Back to Top
Training Participants
| Year |
Program |
Total |
| 1993-1995 |
Participant Training Project for Europe |
65 |
| 1996 |
Participant Training Project for Europe |
57 |
| 1996 |
Entrepreneurial Management and Executive Development Program |
107 |
| Participants under the TRANSIT Program
|
| Year |
Location |
Fiscal |
Financial |
Energy |
Democracy |
Special Initiatives |
Total |
| 1997 |
In-country |
1 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
| Third country |
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
| United States |
|
11 |
4 |
15 |
2 |
32 |
|
| 1998 |
In-country |
205 |
37 |
|
|
|
470 |
| Third country |
|
|
|
|
7 |
7 |
| United States |
7 |
3 |
2 |
|
2 |
14 |
|
| 1999-2000 |
In-country |
334 |
95 |
|
|
|
429 |
| Third country |
10 |
|
|
2 |
|
12 |
| United States |
4 |
13 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
33 |
|
| Seimas Training (In-country) |
309 |
| Total Participants Trained |
1536
|
Back to Top
|
