I absolutely agree that we try to invest as much time as we can in getting the question ‘right’. Sometimes we are a bit too impatient. We are so focused on the need for answers. For others, the natural default position is to advocate a method. Nothing wrong with broadening our toolboxes. But each method has something to offer and also limitations. I feel the question needs to drive everything. All questions are value-laden. Maybe a recognition of this allows us to make wise decisions about what method/s might best help us explore (or even answer) the question. The question might also give us a good reason to be inventive in our design of method/s. As an advocate of strengths-based approaches to improvement, there might be some real benefit in trying to invest in formulating a ‘positive’ question’….and take it from there.
Tony

Luke

Your social accounting method sounds really interesting. Like you, in my work I have noticed that targets can dominate - even just setting the target (never mind tracking it) can take up a lot of resources.

So the assesement of the evidence is based on both qualitative and quantitative evidence? Thats great. We do that sort of thing too, in our “performance story reporting technique”, which is essentially about using multiple lines of evidence to tell the story of the extent to which an intervention has contributed towards outcomes.

Out of interest have you come across “outcomes mapping” by Sarah Earle? In there they use progress markers, which are also a little similar.

Thanks for your post and all the best with your work. Jess

You might be able to give us some tips and examples.

As a result I have been developing an approach based on the social accounting method. It does use a matrix, and it does ask for indicators using the question what would success look like, but the interesting stage is the assessment of the evidence that the organisation produces through the year and the stakeholder views that are incorporated. I have just completed a third years outcome report, and what I am seeing is the developmental changes as an organisation changes over time, adapts to its changing world and learns about new questions that it needs to ask. A surprise has been the way in which the evaluation process has indeed aided the planning process as you describe above.

Also, because the organisation has committed to continuous evaluation in this way, they have adopted a culture and process of review within their practices, so they have the tools to help them to continue the planning and evaluation process.