The evolution of the logic model January 13, 2010
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Communicating outcomes models, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Using the approach, Standards, Outcomes models, DoView , 3commentsI’ve just posted an article on the evolution of the logic model within evaluation. Over the last couple of decades, increasing numbers of evaluators have started using logic models. For those not familiar with what logic models are - they are simply tabular or visual representations of all of the lower-level steps needed to achieve high-level outcomes for a program, organization or other intervention. They go by different names, for instance: program logics, intervention logics, results maps, theories of change, program theories, results hierarchies, strategy maps, end-means diagrams etc.). A traditional way of drawing logic models has evolved (known as the inputs, outputs, intermediate outcomes, final outcomes structured logic model) which often attempts to restrict logic models to a single page. However, many evaluators are now breaking away from the constraints of this traditional format and exploring various alternative ways of representing logic models. (more…)
How many evaluators does it take to change a light bulb? January 9, 2010
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Communicating outcomes models, Using the approach, Outcomes models , add a commentIn response to a series of ‘How many evaluators does it take to change a light bulb?’ jokes on the evaluators list EVALTALK, I whipped up an outcomes model (logic model) for a Changing Light Bulbs Project (some days one does wonder if this is what evaluators do for fun, it must be some sort of illness!).
Anyway here it is http://www.outcomesmodels.org/models/lightbulb62.html
Paul Duignan, PhD. (Follow me on my Outcomes Blog; Twitter; or via my E-Newsletter).
Christmas is over - back to blogging January 7, 2010
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Outcomes models, DoView , 1 comment so farI’ve been quiet for some time on the blogging front as I’ve been developing a number of resources on outcomes modeling (logic modeling), evaluation and related topics. Now Christmas is over and I’m back to work I’ll be blogging in the next few weeks about these resources. I’ll also be blogging about DoView 2.0 which has just been released. It’s full of new features suggested by users and I’ve been building a range of really cool outcomes models with clients using the beta version and using that for input into its development. (more…)
Getting outcomes creds and saving time! September 25, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Doing evaluation more efficiently, Accountability, Outcomes systems architecture, Philanthropy, Strategic planning, Using the approach, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, Standards, DoView , add a commentPublic sector organizations these days have two important imperatives: establishing that they are truly ‘results and outcomes-focused’ while also becoming more efficient in their internal organizational activity. The really good news in the outcomes area is that using a central tool of outcomes work - outcomes models (a particular type of visual model of all of the high-level outcomes the organization is seeking to achieve and the steps it is taking to do so) is that organizations and programs can do both at the same time. (more…)
Using an outcomes modeling approach to action research September 9, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Doing evaluation more efficiently, Using the approach, Outcomes models, Easy Outcomes , add a commentWill get back to blogging on the Australasian Evaluation Society Conference when I get a moment (may not be for a few days). In the meantime had to prepare an article about using outcomes modeling as a basic tool within an action research approach. Because outcomes modeling - developing visual outcomes models (like a type of logic model, or theory of change model) - according to the outcomes theory set of standards for building such models is a generic process, such models can be used for a wide range of purposes. They can, for instance, be used within an action research approach. Action research is an approach which attempts to work in cycles of research/action/research. It has the great virtue of ensuring that research is connected to action and action is connected to research.
(more…)
The Taxi Driver and ‘why don’t you just measure outcomes’ - on the way to AES conference September 1, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Outcomes systems architecture, Reporting systems, Measurement, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Outcomes models, Using the approach, Easy Outcomes , add a commentOn my way to the Australasian Evaluation Society Conference in Canberra my taxi driver in from the airport asked me what I do. When I explained that I ‘measure whether programs, often government programs, work or not so the taxpayer gets value for money’, he was right into the concept. Although I think he thought that I was over complicating things a little. He said: ’shouldn’t it just be a matter of using statistics to measure if things are getting better or not about a program.’ What he was talking about was one aspect of monitoring and evaluation - an important piece - but just one of the Five Building Blocks I see lying behind all monitoring and evaluation systems (outcomes systems). (more…)
Mapping indicators onto a logic model is obvious - but why haven’t we always done it? August 18, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Indicators, Outcomes theory, Reporting systems, Measurement, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, Using the approach, DoView , add a commentI was running a workshop today teaching policy analysts the basics of my approach to program evaluation (Easy Outcomes). One of the participants, when I talked about the importance of always mapping indicators back onto a visual model, commented that when you do it, it’s so obviously the right approach that you can’t understand why we’ve not been doing it for years.
The idea behind this approach is that the way we almost always approach indicator work is to eye-ball a list or table of indicators and ask the question of a group of busy people sitting around a table - ‘does this list of indicators look any good?’
(more…)
Flow of causality in outcomes models and feedback loops August 14, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Measurement, Outcomes theory, Communicating outcomes models, Using the approach, Outcomes models, DoView , 4commentsA quick technical blog here. Fellow evaluator Rick Davies pointed out in a post on one of my outcomes theory articles (on how to best represent causal models), that strictly visualizing causality as flowing in one direction within an outcomes model (logic model, results map, logframe, theory of change etc.) could be seen as preventing the representation of feedback loops. This is because if you are, as I usually do, representing causality as flowing from bottom to top within a model (others do it left to right) then when you want to represent a feedback loop it will, of necessity, have to flow back down the logic model against the direction in which causality is being represented. (more…)
The good old ‘one pager’ contraint again July 9, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Doing evaluation more efficiently, Outcomes systems architecture, Communicating outcomes models, Using the approach, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, DoView , add a commentI’ve been up against the good old ‘one pager’ constraint again in a couple of contexts recently. This is where there is the demand that the outcomes for an organization or program be ‘put on one page’. It comes in various forms and is often a demand from senior management or a perceived demand from them to ‘keep things simple’. Now, there’s nothing wrong with the idea of summarizing things and paper overviews play a role in that. But such things should be seen as one of a range of different types of summaries and products which are produced by an underlying outcomes system, not the beginning and end of an outcomes effort. (more…)
Intense analysis of the U.N. Results-Based Management System May 5, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Outcomes theory, Outcomes systems architecture, Attribution, Reporting systems, Indicators, Accountability, Standards, Using the approach, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Measurement, Outcomes models , add a commentI have just put up an Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base article which is an intense analysis of the United Nation Results-Based Management System. (Its obscure work, but someone has to do it!). The exciting part is that it has let me road-test my new Outcomes Systems Checklist. This now provides a common framework for analyzing any outcomes system - outcomes systems being any system which attempts to identify, measure, attribute or hold parties to account for outcomes or the steps which it is thought lead to them. A 2008 report from the U.N. itself on its Results-Based Management System said that the system was: ‘an administrative chore of little value to accountability and decision-making”.