A Capacity-Building Framework: A Search for Concept and Purpose

Abstract

A growing number of persons (capacity builders) purport to be doing something they call They go about this activity in a variety of ways-demonstrations, grants, consulting, training and development, and circuit riding, to name a few. Capacity building tends to address specialized management issues-financial management, organization development, grantsmanship, and service integration, for instance-usually depending upon the purview and interests of the capacity builders. These characteristics of capacity building are not necessarily bad. Attempts to address the broad gamut of management issues may be overly ambitious and do the client a disservice. Bolstering management practices in specific areas can build support for extending administrative improvements to others. Further, by making changes incrementally, useful knowledge is gained for application to future innovations. Hence, it may be wise to focus attention on selected management problems. In too many cases, however, capacity building is conceived of as the application of a particular approach to every management problem in any context. Or it is considered as the improvement of a facet of management which is equated with organizational capacity. An urgent need exists for a concept and purpose in capacity building. This need is underscored by the recent budget-cutting climate, which means that governments will have to operate more efficiently and effectively with fewer resources. Further, with the Reagan administration's proposals to consolidate several categorical grant programs into block grants administered by the states, many of those affected-particularly mayors and interest groups that benefited from categoricals-have raised questions concerning the capacities of various states to take on new responsibilities. Since the administration's long-range plans also call for revenue turnbacks, the states' fiscal and management capacities are both timely issues.