Guest Blog by Maria Agostina Cacault, IPP ’25
When I began the Implementing Public Policy program at Harvard Kennedy School in May 2025, I thought I understood my challenge: there was a “lack of human rights and gender perspective in the legal proceedings of Buenos Aires Province State Attorney’s Office.” Like many of us working in public policy, I believed the problem was primarily about awareness – people simply didn’t know about rights-based approaches or weren’t convinced of their importance.
How wrong I was.
Over six months of systematic iteration using PDIA methodology, my understanding transformed completely. By the end, I realized the real challenge was far more complex: legal staff lacked clear criteria and practical frameworks to systematically integrate human rights considerations into fiscal defense decisions, resulting in missed opportunities to balance fiscal responsibility with rights protection.
The difference between these two problem statements captures the essence of what PDIA taught me: moving from assumptions to evidence, from solutions-in-search-of-problems to deep problem understanding.
Key Learnings from IPP
PDIA is about learning, not implementing predetermined solutions. In Argentina, we’re skilled at analyzing problems critically, but PDIA showed me something different – the Albanian and Croatian cases demonstrated how to construct shared narratives around problems that mobilize stakeholders, and how to use rapid experimentation to surface real barriers rather than just theoretically analyzing them.
Authorization is not binary – it’s multi-layered and must be continuously built. I learned to distinguish between formal authorization (having permission), social authorization (having support), and practical authorization (having resources). My challenge required all three, and building them became as important as the technical work itself.
Complex problems require iterative learning, not perfect planning. With my challenge scoring 25 out of 40 on the unknowns assessment, traditional plan-and-control approaches would have failed. Instead, PDIA’s iterative methodology allowed me to discover solutions through systematic experimentation.
Small wins build capability and momentum – and must be celebrated. Rather than waiting for dramatic breakthroughs, I learned to value incremental progress that builds both functional capacity and institutional legitimacy. Equally important, I discovered that celebrating these small victories with my team and stakeholders reinforced the value of our approach and sustained motivation during the long journey of complex institutional change.
My Six-Month Journey
Iterations 1-2: Understanding the Real Problem
Initially, I focused on “awareness gaps” – believing people simply didn’t know about rights-based approaches. Through systematic conversations with middle authorities like Sub-secretary Dr. Ariel Ibañez and Legal Secretary Leticia Viguier, I discovered the deeper truth: staff could identify when rights issues were present, but lacked clear criteria for when and how to apply rights frameworks in fiscal defense contexts.
This insight shifted everything. The problem wasn’t awareness – it was the absence of practical frameworks.
Iterations 3-4: Building Strategic Networks
A strategic opportunity emerged when I attended the Institut National du Service Public (INSP) program on “Women Executives: Leadership and Workplace Equality” in Paris. This international experience provided crucial validation – similar challenges exist across public administrations globally. More importantly, it connected me with experts like Ana Pérez from Expertise France’s EUROsociAL program, who confirmed our approach aligned with EU-funded initiatives in Latin America.
Simultaneously, I leveraged a workplace wellbeing survey across all Sub-secretariats to refresh the rights-based agenda. Rather than presenting these as separate initiatives, I demonstrated how both addressed institutional culture transformation – a key insight about integrating multiple organizational priorities.
Iterations 5-6: From Evidence to Action
The breakthrough came when I stopped focusing on changing minds and started generating concrete evidence. My team produced specific reports – on injunctions (amparos) and labor cases – that demonstrated how integrating rights perspectives actually strengthened fiscal defense arguments rather than weakening them.
This evidence-based approach transformed stakeholder conversations. Instead of defending the concept of rights integration, I could show tangible examples of its value. Legal staff began requesting frameworks rather than resisting them.
Progress Made Through PDIA
Functional Progress:
- Territorial Expansion: From internal team work to pilot workshops across all 20 provincial delegations, starting with Mar del Plata
- Concrete Products: Published injunctions report incorporating human rights analysis; advanced labor cases analysis with rights framework
- Team Development: Added team member Julia Martiarena; organized CFI delegation training strengthening organizational capabilities
- Evidence Generation: Created systematic methodology for integrating rights considerations into fiscal analysis
Legitimacy Building:
- Authorization Expansion: From Sub-secretary level to State Attorney (Fiscal de Estado) authorization
- Stakeholder Network: Built collaborative relationships across multiple Sub-secretariats through systematic engagement
- International Recognition: Gained validation from EUROsociAL program and INSP networks
- Academic Connections: Leveraged Harvard connections including participation in Dani Rodrik’s talk to expand policy networks
Before IPP, I approached policy implementation linearly: analyze the problem, design the solution, implement it. PDIA taught me that in complex environments, solutions emerge through systematic engagement with stakeholders and iterative learning from action.
The Rob Wilkinson 4P leadership model became particularly powerful. Perception helped me question my assumptions about resistance – what I initially interpreted as obstruction often reflected genuine concerns about workload or unclear implementation expectations. People taught me that paying attention to emotional signals and acknowledging contributions, even small ones, builds the relationships essential for cultural change. Process showed me how to create structures that facilitate effective collaboration across departments with different priorities.
Most importantly, I learned that my role wasn’t to convince people to adopt rights-based approaches, but to facilitate the emergence of practical solutions that balanced fiscal responsibility with human rights protection.
Working in Buenos Aires Province during the Milei administration presented unique challenges. The conservative national government’s hostility toward human rights created risks for this work. PDIA’s iterative approach proved essential – by framing rights integration as “institutional improvement” rather than ideological positioning, and by generating concrete evidence of fiscal benefits, I could maintain authorization even in a difficult political environment.
The workplace wellbeing data we collected creates natural entry points for expanding rights integration across the organization. Rather than imposed change, this becomes responsive to expressed institutional needs.
The international networks developed through INSP and Harvard provide ongoing technical assistance opportunities. Ana Pérez’s October-November timeline for potential EUROsociAL collaboration aligns perfectly with our evidence generation phase.
Most importantly, the systematic methodology we developed – combining stakeholder mapping, evidence generation, and iterative framework testing – can be applied to other complex institutional transformation challenges.
Words of Wisdom for Fellow PDIA Practitioners
Trust the process, especially when it feels slow. In complex environments, what appears as delayed progress is often deep capability building. Each conversation, each small experiment, each relationship builds the foundation for sustainable change.
Listen first, advocate never. As I learned from Leticia and countless other conversations, listening is a very powerful tool. Rather than trying to convince stakeholders about the importance of your approach, ask genuine questions about their experience and truly hear their answers. Understanding how challenges manifest in their daily work reveals the real entry points for change.
Pay attention to authorization at multiple levels. Formal permission is necessary but insufficient. Build social authorization through relationships and practical authorization through capability development.
Context matters more than best practices. International experiences provide valuable insights, but solutions must emerge from your specific institutional and political reality.
Small wins are not consolation prizes – they’re building blocks. Each incremental success builds both functional capacity and institutional confidence necessary for larger transformations.
Six months ago, I began this journey believing I needed to implement rights-based approaches in Buenos Aires Province’s State Attorney’s Office. Today, I understand that my role is to facilitate the emergence of solutions that balance fiscal defense with human rights protection.
PDIA taught me that in complex policy environments, we cannot predict or control outcomes, but we can create conditions for good solutions to emerge through systematic engagement, iterative learning, and continuous adaptation to what we discover.
To my fellow IPP practitioners around the world: trust in the power of systematic iteration, build authorization through evidence and relationships, and remember that sustainable policy implementation is not a lonely endeavor. As Matt Andrews reminded us, when we combine our efforts and create opportunities for others to work with us, amazing music gets made.
The work continues, but now with clear frameworks, strong relationships, and deep confidence in the PDIA methodology that transforms both problems and practitioners.
This is a blog series written by the alumni of the Implementing Public Policy Executive Education Program at the Harvard Kennedy School. 36 Participants successfully completed this 5-month hybrid program in September 2025. These are their learning journey stories.