Managing evaluation: Responding to common problems with a 10-step process

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is now a clear choice of frameworks for managing program evaluation - the managing of one or more studies or the managing of an evaluation capacity building structure and process. This is a distinction with a difference, and this article conceptualizes that difference and shows how the two frameworks understand three problems common to program evaluation: (a) lack of systematic integration within a larger program improvement process, (b) difficulty in finding an appropriate evaluator, and (c) lack of appropriate conceptualization prior to the inception of the evaluation study. Two practice-based approaches to these problems are presented and interpreted using the two frameworks. These frameworks show clear distinctions and differences between the two managerial approaches. These are practice-tested approaches developed over 30 years of doing and managing evaluations in an evaluation unit in the United States, where there are seemingly clear differences with Canada in at least the public sector and in practices around stakeholder participation in relation to use practices. Our experience shows that program managers and managers of program evaluation services have clear choices in how they manage program evaluation in the public and nonprofit sectors across public health and other human services, and these choices have implications for organizational development, managing an evaluation unit, and interorganizational relations.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)103-123
Number of pages21
JournalCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation
Volume25
Issue number2
StatePublished - Sep 1 2010

Fingerprint

evaluation
public sector
manager
non-profit sector
organizational development
lack
building
public health
stakeholder
Canada
participation
experience

Cite this

Managing evaluation : Responding to common problems with a 10-step process. / Compton, Donald W.; Baizerman, Michael L; VeLure Roholt, Ross R.

In: Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, Vol. 25, No. 2, 01.09.2010, p. 103-123.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d48b4f4ef8d7404da6a623003dbbd29a,
title = "Managing evaluation: Responding to common problems with a 10-step process",
abstract = "There is now a clear choice of frameworks for managing program evaluation - the managing of one or more studies or the managing of an evaluation capacity building structure and process. This is a distinction with a difference, and this article conceptualizes that difference and shows how the two frameworks understand three problems common to program evaluation: (a) lack of systematic integration within a larger program improvement process, (b) difficulty in finding an appropriate evaluator, and (c) lack of appropriate conceptualization prior to the inception of the evaluation study. Two practice-based approaches to these problems are presented and interpreted using the two frameworks. These frameworks show clear distinctions and differences between the two managerial approaches. These are practice-tested approaches developed over 30 years of doing and managing evaluations in an evaluation unit in the United States, where there are seemingly clear differences with Canada in at least the public sector and in practices around stakeholder participation in relation to use practices. Our experience shows that program managers and managers of program evaluation services have clear choices in how they manage program evaluation in the public and nonprofit sectors across public health and other human services, and these choices have implications for organizational development, managing an evaluation unit, and interorganizational relations.",
author = "Compton, {Donald W.} and Baizerman, {Michael L} and {VeLure Roholt}, {Ross R}",
year = "2010",
month = "9",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "25",
pages = "103--123",
journal = "Canadian Review of American Studies",
issn = "0007-7720",
publisher = "Canadian Association for American Studies",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Managing evaluation

T2 - Responding to common problems with a 10-step process

AU - Compton, Donald W.

AU - Baizerman, Michael L

AU - VeLure Roholt, Ross R

PY - 2010/9/1

Y1 - 2010/9/1

N2 - There is now a clear choice of frameworks for managing program evaluation - the managing of one or more studies or the managing of an evaluation capacity building structure and process. This is a distinction with a difference, and this article conceptualizes that difference and shows how the two frameworks understand three problems common to program evaluation: (a) lack of systematic integration within a larger program improvement process, (b) difficulty in finding an appropriate evaluator, and (c) lack of appropriate conceptualization prior to the inception of the evaluation study. Two practice-based approaches to these problems are presented and interpreted using the two frameworks. These frameworks show clear distinctions and differences between the two managerial approaches. These are practice-tested approaches developed over 30 years of doing and managing evaluations in an evaluation unit in the United States, where there are seemingly clear differences with Canada in at least the public sector and in practices around stakeholder participation in relation to use practices. Our experience shows that program managers and managers of program evaluation services have clear choices in how they manage program evaluation in the public and nonprofit sectors across public health and other human services, and these choices have implications for organizational development, managing an evaluation unit, and interorganizational relations.

AB - There is now a clear choice of frameworks for managing program evaluation - the managing of one or more studies or the managing of an evaluation capacity building structure and process. This is a distinction with a difference, and this article conceptualizes that difference and shows how the two frameworks understand three problems common to program evaluation: (a) lack of systematic integration within a larger program improvement process, (b) difficulty in finding an appropriate evaluator, and (c) lack of appropriate conceptualization prior to the inception of the evaluation study. Two practice-based approaches to these problems are presented and interpreted using the two frameworks. These frameworks show clear distinctions and differences between the two managerial approaches. These are practice-tested approaches developed over 30 years of doing and managing evaluations in an evaluation unit in the United States, where there are seemingly clear differences with Canada in at least the public sector and in practices around stakeholder participation in relation to use practices. Our experience shows that program managers and managers of program evaluation services have clear choices in how they manage program evaluation in the public and nonprofit sectors across public health and other human services, and these choices have implications for organizational development, managing an evaluation unit, and interorganizational relations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=80054687031&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=80054687031&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:80054687031

VL - 25

SP - 103

EP - 123

JO - Canadian Review of American Studies

JF - Canadian Review of American Studies

SN - 0007-7720

IS - 2

ER -