Crowd Sourcing: How to be a good evaluator

Crowd Sourcing: How to be a good evaluator: Do This, Not That| weitzenegger.de.

How to be a good evaluator? (A new crowd sourcing exercise)

Results-based management in international development cooperation seems to require super heroes to evaluate it. How can you perform as a good evaluator and live on happily? Can you give us some practical advice from your experience? It will end up in a tip sheet for future evaluators.
Consider this:
1. What education, abilities, skills and experience are really needed?
2. How do you bring in your social and personal competencies (e.g., Social competence, Communication, Cooperative behaviour, Self-management, Team Management, Learning and problem solving)?
3. What does it take to meet the Standards (e.g., Independence, Stakeholder consultation and protection, Validity, Clarity, Fairness, Completeness, Transparency, and Timeliness)?
4. How do you prepare an assignment well (e.g., clarification, roles, stakeholder involvements, methodology, information and knowledge, logistics, time constraints, etc.)?
5. What behaviour is appropriate when evaluating (e.g., perspectives, techniques, self-awareness, respect, power-sharing, capacity building, give and take feedback)?
6. How do you master field work (e.g., stakeholder involvement, cultural competencies, diversity, credibility, presentation, transparent knowledge management)?
7. The day after: How do you follow-up after or in between evaluations?
8. What else are considered good practices as evaluator?
9. The Don’ts: What common mistakes should be avoided when evaluating?
10. What related guidance is already published elsewhere?

Please drop your ideas on this here as a comment.

Kind regards,
Karsten Weitzenegger

Advertisements

One thought on “Crowd Sourcing: How to be a good evaluator

  1. I found this text in: Looking Back, Moving Forward
    Sida Evaluation Manual, Published by Sida 2004
    Authors: Stefan Molund and Göran Schill
    http://www.alnap.org/pool/files/evaluation_manual_sida.pdf

    The skills and other qualifications needed by the evaluators vary from case to case, but the following are usually important:

    EVALUATION EXPERTISE
    This is a package of skills. It includes the conceptual and methodological skills required for successful evaluation research. It includes the communicative skills necessary for creating rapport with stakeholders, facilitating stakeholder participation, and effectively presenting evaluation results to diverse audiences. It also includes the organisational skills necessary for planning and managing an often complex evaluation research process involving many people.

    SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTISE
    This is always important, although more so in some evaluations than in others. For example, in an evaluation of an intervention to encourage police officers to alter attitude and behaviour towards the poor, some knowledge of factors determining police attitudes and behaviour would be required. It is not until the evaluation questions have been formulated, however, that the need for subject matter expertise can be more precisely defined.

    LOCAL KNOWLEDGE
    Since determinants of project success are often local in nature, a good understanding of local social and cultural conditions can be very important. For example, in an evaluation of efforts to reform police behaviour in South Africa, some knowledge about apartheid and South African politics of ethnicity would no doubt be useful. Normally, evaluators also need local knowledge to be able to successfully interact with stakeholders. When the evaluation involves contacts with street-level officials or representatives of target groups, language skills may be required.

    INDEPENDENCE AND DETACHMENT
    Independence from the object of evaluation and freedom from bias are important requirements regardless of the purpose of the evaluation. Along with the skills mentioned above, both are determinants of the credibility of the evaluation. If the evaluation team is thought to be unqualified, its members regarded as culturally or ideologically biased or too closely involved with the client or other stakeholders, credibility will suffer.

Comments are closed.