In the final module of the digitally connected learning, we discover the complementarity of protective action from a humanitarian, military, and peacekeeping perspective. Unfortunately, many of the unintended consequences of helping people in need, derive from a lack of dialogue in preparing for the response. We often harmonize our action too late, when actors are not ready or not willing to take corrective measures.

At this stage of the learning journey, we should be clear about the added value of UN-CMCoord competencies in support of the protection outcomes. We connect the training audience with front-line protection specialists from the humanitarian and peace & security community.

Take our game on the humanitarian definition to protection.

Watch a video on Three tiers of protection of civilians in peacekeeping (1.47).

Complete our microcourse on UN-CMCoord and Protection

Complete our microcourse on UN-CMCoord: Persuading Near and Up

Here are a few quotes from our graduates.

This week’s part on POC was very interesting and rich with lessons learned from front liners colleagues. Most of these lessons are applicable in any context. Personally, I found that the scenario with all the discussions helped understand how a UN CMCoord should be an enabler for POC. She/He should always have the POC in the background of their work and consequently helps immensely in the effective application of the egg model and specifically the immediate response. The preparation of UN CMCoord officer in anticipation of any crisis will help put in place usable platforms/networks for a better coordination between different stakeholders.

As for the Leadership/influencing part, I found particularly useful tools/necessity that a UN CMCoord officer should use in her/his continuous assessment of the environment, resulting in a better adaptation with constant changes and challenges.

I and S. found the week six topics very interesting and relevant. The role CMCoord officer could play to contribute to the protection outcomes, the different tiers of PoC with the possible violations as learnt from the scenario were impressive. The topic on pursuing near and up was so exciting and helped us to look into the different leadership models and the different types of leadership that get to result. Above all, we were impressed with the conductor video and the 16 personality types on which I spent many hours in putting myself to which category, and S. shared with me his experience of going through such exercise in self-assessment of personality type a long time ago.

Some of the learnings key take-outs for the week for me have been, on one hand, the different levels of intervention for protection work (the Egg Model developed by the ICRC) since this would allow to reflect to different types of actions that organisations working on Protection can do and the relevance to involve different stakeholders at each stage of the process (Responsive, Remedial or Environment building). On another hand, I found very useful how the type of personality of each individual can determine the most adequate style of leadership and the most effective influencing technique. An in-depth self-awareness can allow us to enhance our own impactful and persuasive leadership style.

Speaking with M. this week, it was eye opening to see the humanitarian perspective of protection. Maintaining access to local populations in need is a key task, and one that military leaders can easily overlook. The military function of protection naturally focuses on their own forces and associated actors, which can include humanitarians. But an outward focused protection scheme, which focuses not only on ensuring the security of local populations but on ensuring their access to humanitarian services is critical for successful civil military cooperation. Military planners must reach out to humanitarian actors (and closely work with the CMcoord) to ensure their needs and perspectives are included in protection planning.

This week was interesting as the CMCoord Officer's task exceeds the 5 basic ones which was introduced during Week 2, s/he has 3 additional complementary task which have enabling affects in access, security and protection domains. The 5 areas of CMCoord task in support of protection outcomes seem to be stand alone activities but when compared to the 5 basic tasks, it can be seen a complementary when the mapping and assessment of the stakeholders/actors are done. It is evidently clear the protection of civilian i.e. the affected people is prime importance and humanitarian action goes beyond the function of providing physical protection only.