In December 2013 Rose Ann Dimairai-Ghalili et al, published an article: “Capacity Building in nutrition science: revisiting the curricula for medical professionals”.They reviewed the current nutrition education curricula for students in U.S. medical schools, and schools of other health professions, such as nursing and oral health. They found evidence as these curricula do not provide enough opportunity to gain knowledge of the interactions among micro- and macronutrients, their role in maintaining optimal body functions, factors that interfere with these interactions, or, importantly, how to integrate this knowledge into medical practice. There is a need to better prepare healthcare professionals for identifying nutrition risk and managing hospitalized patients, especially those with chronic conditions, using an inter-professional, teambased approach.Dr Ted Baartmans will take the opportunity to get to the origin of the term “Capacity Building” since it was introduced in the United Nations Programs. Capacity Building takes place on an individual level, an institutional level and the societal level. In his presentation Ted will focus on the individual level. What kind of leadership does this term or approach requires for Iran? How does it connect to the study of Dimairai-Ghalili? How does it refer to encourage so called constructive dissent.Studying ‘Capacity Building in Nutrition’ unfolds the blind spots of leadership within the sector. Let’s illuminate these spots in this international gathering to understand, accept and respect our leadership responsibilities and behavior for the greater good.

Purpose: Network governance is an analytical framework for comprehending and adjusting relations among the relevant actors so that they can face multi-faceted and complicated issues in the policy-making process and public administration. This research intends to design a model for Capacity Building in network governance. Methodology: The statistical population fell into two parts. The first part covered the qualitative administrative system with 25 academic and organizational experts in the concepts and applications of network governance. The purposive judgment sampling method was applied here. The second part of the population, taking up a quantitative approach, consisted of public sector managers, from among of whom 390 individuals were randomly selected. Findings: Results show that Capacity Building in network governance is achievable in the framework of such themes as formulating network governance policies, creating network relations between public and private sectors and civil society, creating a participative foundation among governance actors, enhancing administrative Capacity based on network, outsourcing government duties, and establishing network management mechanisms. Besides, there are some causal factors as follow: changing politicians’,views,integrated government,expanding IT,citizens’,demanding orientation,contextual factors including financial, economic, political, legal, social, cultural, and technological conditions,intervening factors such as internal organizational readiness as well as external organizational readiness of private and civic sectors. The outcomes of network governance establishment are the prevalence of public values, flexible reaction to demands, and reduction in public services costs, specializing services, innovation and transparency. Originality: This study introduced a new design for Capacity Building in network governance, which is contingent with significant outcomes for network governance like the prevalence of public values governance for both society and government. It also introduced network governance as a framework for public management. Implications: Considering the presented model, suggestions have been made regarding Capacity Building in the government in order to establish network governance like integration of government’, s scattered processes and developing managers in line with network thinking.

Background and aim: Priority setting is an important process for research management in all sections, especially in health section. Priority setting would be more valuable for limited founds allocation. Priority setting will help all countries in planning research programs of health section, collection and allocation of research resources and strengthening native research capacities. Besides the researchers, the stakeholders, who should participate in priority setting, will be affected from the research results. In this study, the priority setting following needs assessment in Farrokhshahr city of Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province of Iran has been performed.Methods: This was a community based participatory research which was performed by Farrokhshahr development team and supervised by Shahrekord university of medical sciences deputy for research affairs. At the first, data collected from need assessment survey using rapid appraisal method was classified. Then considering factors such as living conditions, environmental factors, institutions’ structures and recognizing facilitating factors priority setting was carried out. Two dimensional matrix, priority diagram and table of analyzing problems were used for priority setting.Results: In this study 40 problems of Farrokhshahr community in 9 categories consisted of elderly, young, security, sport, women, health and psychological problems were subjected to priority setting using two-dimensional matrix. In this process, 20 priorities with the most frequency in two-dimensional matrix were achieved. Then every priority was analyzed to recognize the measures to overcome the problem.Conclusion: Considering limited resources in the developing countries, priority setting with participation of people is a solution and this process cause’s Capacity Building in the community.