Drawing logic models (outcomes models) January 5, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Communicating outcomes models, DoView, Outcomes models, Outcomes theory, Uncategorized , trackback
I have just finished a substantial article on what I call outcomes models. They go by names such as: logic models, program logics, program theories, theories of change, ends-means diagram, strategy maps etc. and are used widely through evaluation.
In the article I attempt to go beyond the traditional received conventions about logic models which I think are usually unexamined in ‘how to’ books and much of the discussion of logic models.
The essence of my argument is that:
- There are six possible purposes for outcomes models – the first being to provide a picture of ‘what it is believed causes what to happen’ – what I call a ‘full’ outcomes model.
- Because people attempt to also use models to indicate measurability and demonstrability (attribution of changes in high-level steps and outcomes to a program) they end up truncating their models so much (limiting them to the measurable or the demonstrable) that they fail to achieve the first purpose of creating a picture of a ‘full’ model. Measurement and demonstrability (attribution) should be done after the model has been built.
- Most ‘technologies of representation’ – tables, single page diagrams etc – are hopeless at representing anything like a ‘full’ model of the causality behind a program. Hence they attract attacks as inadequate representations of programs.
- Models should be drawn in logic model software such as DoView so as to be able to represent full models (as large as they need to be, anything linked to anything else) and then measurement and demonstrability (attribution) can be mapped back onto them. This means they can achieve the purposes of the traditional conventional approaches to logic models without having their limitations.
If you have a moment, check out the article, any feedback appreciated. The article is here.
Paul Duignan PhD
Comments»
A Topic Article within the Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base
In the past there have been many ways of drawing outcomes models. Such models go by various names including: logic models, program logics, intervention logics, means-ends diagrams, logframes, theories of change, program theories, outcomes hierarchies and strategy maps. The traditional ways of drawing such models are a combination of the purposes for which people want to use the models, plus the limitations of the ‘technology of representation’ being used to represent the model (whiteboard, paper, software etc.). A standard convention visualizing an outcomes model is described which should be generally suitable for any performance management, strategic prioritization, evaluation, monitoring, contracting or related outcomes system. This is an article in the Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base.
————–
mukesh11
Drug Intervention-Drug Intervention