Five open practices to support effective capacity building: the case of the Every1 energy digitalisation project

Testing the Every1 board game in Porto

Image by Beck Pitt is licensed CC BY 4.0

By Dr Beck Pitt and Dr Irina Rets

The Horizon/UKRI funded Every1 project aims to engage diverse stakeholders in energy digitalisation across Europe. Collaborating with 11 organisations from seven countries, The Open University’s Institute of Educational Technology (IET) plays a key role in co-creating openly licensed learning materials on energy digitalisation.

The project is producing 80 openly licensed materials (CC BY-SA 4.0) which are co-created and tested with different stakeholders (known as ecosystems and representative of a wide range of different organisations and initiatives including energy communities, SMEs and local authorities). These resources build capacity and raise awareness of energy digitalisation. Learning materials will be translated into multiple European languages.

In this blog we share five open practices used to support the development of learning materials. Reflective interviews with consortium members highlight the impact of open approaches and how these help to achieve the project’s mission: to empower everyone to engage in energy digitalisation.

1. "You said, we did" – feedback-driven development

I have seen this before, when ecosystems contribute insights at the start of a three-year project but hear nothing until the end.

Core to developing learning materials was a feedback-driven methodology that involved incorporating ecosystem testing feedback on the materials and sharing updates on the changes made via showcase webinars. This fosters transparency, trust, and engagement. One partner noted that this approach was especially important for stakeholders with negative past experiences, as it demonstrated genuine commitment to their needs. It also strengthened internal consortium capacity, reinforcing a culture of responsiveness and accountability.

2. Agile sprints for iterative development

Every cycle we improve and learn from the previous one.

The need to rapidly develop and test different types of learning materials required an agile approach. Dividing the development and testing into short, time-bound cycles allowed manageable progress, continuous improvement, and iterative feedback. In each cycle, sprints were used to facilitate and structure the rapid development of different types of learning materials by expert author teams. As one partner commented “having this abundance of materials was alarming in the beginning, and no one was really sure how to approach this”. This practice helped to engage partners, especially those not directly responsible for final outputs, clarified responsibilities and timelines.

Ecosystems also benefited - reviewing content in stages instead of all at once made feedback more manageable and meaningful. The iterative process kept ecosystems engaged and ensured materials met their evolving needs.

3. Open licensing from the start

Publicly funded outputs should not be locked behind a paywall.

The project’s choice of Creative Commons license (CC BY-SA 4.0) ensures materials can be easily updated, localised and adapted for different contexts. Many consortium members were new to open licensing and commented on how it removed barriers to reuse. “As a result, learning resources are being used immediately upon release, as ecosystems hold their own information events, and they are happy to have other trusted sources”, one partner noted.

4. Interactive online training for consortium alignment

We all got on the same page

IET led internal workshops on topics that were new to many partners - such as Open Educational Resources (OERs), open licensing, and learning personas - created a common understanding within the consortium. One partner noted, “we all have different ways of doing things. But one partner explaining the topic and sharing their expertise, helped the consortium to adopt similar methods and work more as a team”.  Although indirect, this alignment improved the quality of the learning materials and allowed the project to “sync the terms used in communication with ecosystems across partners”. This created a more unified approach of working with the ecosystems and communicating project deliverables.

5. Storytelling for effective communication

I now think about the story I want to tell when sharing my own research.

Developing materials that unfold as a story was another central capacity-building practice. This practice helped shift away from traditional academic formats. “You don’t feel like you are back to school, making material creation and use more engaging”, one partner commented. Additionally, in the project, storytelling ensured consistency across materials, strengthening project branding. Another partner noted that this method even improved how they disseminate their own research in a more accessible way.

The Every1 project demonstrates how open capacity-building practices strengthen international consortia and ecosystems. By prioritising feedback-driven development, agile sprints, open licensing, interactive training, and storytelling, the project has fostered collaboration, transparency, and engagement across diverse stakeholders. These practices offer valuable lessons for future initiatives aiming for open, inclusive, and impactful capacity-building.