So much for good resolutions (see previous post), but it has been a busy time.
I am involved in several evaluations at present, some of programmes that are just starting, some of things that are coming to an end and some that are still running and what an external view of how they are doing.
How about a bit of jargon here? For those that are starting or still going, the evaluation should be formative – i.e. looking at how things are being done, and what can be improved. For those that are coming to an end, it is summative evaluation – summing up what has been achieved, and ideally how well that process has gone as well.
For me, formative evaluations that focus too much on demonstrating achievement, and don’t look carefully at process and what can be improved in how things are done are a bit of a waste of time and money. You should have management information that helps you to keep an eye on how well you are doing – if you don’t you should be worried. The formative evaluation should look at how things are working, digging behind the performance figures to see if you are doing well despite poor systems, ineffective communication and lack of partner buy-in (in which case how much better could you do with those things fixed). Or if you are doing badly, what is it that is causing that? Systems, people, relationships, the environment you are working in, or a poor concept initially?
I think if things are not going to profile, people are far more open to formative evaluation, but if performance is good or above profile, they tend to sit back on their laurels and not worry about how that performance is being achieved. And that is a mistake in my view. Either there are lessons that can be learned by others, including those funding your project, because you have got it right, or things that can be made better, and help save resources or push activity further and do more good.
Do you know why you are doing well?
Comments