Integrating Monitoring and Evaluation to Support Decisions in Difficult – A FREE Webinar for Public Sector Managers and Practitioners
May 1, 2012
Steve Montague will be delivering a FREE webinar on May 9th, 2012 for the Performance and Planning Exchange. This FREE webinar will help you produce and use results planning, monitoring and evaluation evidence to support decision making. Register now at https://networkedgovernment.ca/managingmatters/.
Most managers see measurement (monitoring) and evaluation as distinct functions. Yet, in times of restraint when the tough decisions need to be made, integrating them can help managers and governments meet their goals.
Participants will:
• Learn how to integrate monitoring and evaluation to cost effectively support management decisions
• Get tools and templates so they can align initiatives with mission and vision, set priorities, plan results and assess progress
• Review applied examples relevant to policy, program and regulatory functions in public sector and multiple-stakeholder initiatives
Dealing with Complex Causality and Small Data Sets? Try a Theory Based Approach and Qualitative Comparative Analysis
March 12, 2012
Theory based approaches (see http://www.pmn.net/wp-content/uploads/Theory-based-Approaches-for-Practical-Evaluation.pdf) lend themselves to a broad range of applications, including situations of high complexity and small numbers of cases. These are situations where both conceptually and practically, conventional statistical analysis just doesn’t fit (Befani, Lederman and Sager 2007). European evaluators (Befani, Lederman and Sager 2007, Sager and Lederman 2012) have recently suggested that Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) can be combined with theory-based approaches to provide at least a partial answer to this problem. The following deck presents a simple illustration of how realistic evaluation and a QCA approach might be combined (click here for the deck http://www.pmn.net/wp-content/uploads/Realist-Synthesis-and-Qualitative-Comparative-Analysis.pdf. At PMN we have begun to use this approach in our current evaluation practice. We find it straight-forward, potentially cost-effective and compelling. For more information contact steve.montague@pmn.net.
Theory-based Approaches presentation well received at Canadian Evaluation Society’s Annual Learning Event
February 29, 2012
The presentation entitled Theory-based Approaches for Practical Evaluation (http://www.pmn.net/wp-content/uploads/Theory-based-Approaches-for-Practical-Evaluation.pdf) played to standing room only at the Canadian Evaluation Society’s Annual Learning Event on February 21, 2012.
For reproductions of the presentation by Steve Montague and by Joanne Roulston and Eric Seraphim of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency see the above hotlink to our library. Presentations by Treasury Board Secretariat representative Brian Moosang and Human Resources and Skills Development Canada representative Terry Colpitts should be available through CES.
Course Update: Continued Strong Reviews for Measurement and Evaluation Course for Regulators
June 15, 2011
A recent delivery of R003 Performance Measurement and Evaluation for Regulators was March 24th and 25th at the Canada School of Public Service. We note that facilitator – PMN partner, Steve Montague continued to get exceptional reviews – in spite of the fact that the course is attracting a much broader group than regulators. The facilitator ratings out of ‘5’ for effectiveness, creating an environment conducive to learning and for knowledge averaged 4.8, 4.8 and 4.92 respectively. Some participant comments included:
“Excellent!”
- “It was very informative and beneficial.”
- “Steve is an extremely passionate and informed individual. This course could not have a better instructor.”
- “Outstanding! Knowledgable, friendly and accessible. Excellent pace.”
- “Facilitator was excellent – very engaging and extremely knowledgeable. The course itself was also engaging and I believe will be applicable to my day to day activities in the future.”
-”The instructor’s enthusiasm and knowledge of the subject matter were very helpful in making this course enjoyable and productive.”
Steve Montague made Fellow of the Canadian Evaluation Society
May 26, 2011
We are pleased to note that PMN partner and co-founder Steve Montague was made a Fellow of the Canadian Evaluation Society at the Society’s National Conference in May 2011. This is the highest award which can be conveyed on Canadian Evaluation Society members.
Cllick here for details: http://www.evaluationcanada.ca/site.cgi?s=1&ss=1&_lang=EN&num=01354
Rave Reviews
February 16, 2011
Rave Reviews For Regulatory Performance Measurement and Evaluation Facilitated by Steve Montague
Recent Canada School offerings of the course Regulatory Performance Measurement and Evaluation have been receiving rave reviews from attendees. The following table is an excerpt from the actual course evaluation report produced by the Canada School of the Public Service for the November 2010 offering of the course.
Source: Canada School of Public Service, November 30, 2010.
Future offerings of this course can be seen at http://www.csps-efpc.gc.ca/cat/det-eng.asp?courseno=R003. For other course offerings by Steve Montague – and / or customized course offerings – email info@pmn.net.
Update: Our 2009 Prediction Re: Stimulus Funding Comes True
February 15, 2011
Globe and Mail November 24th The Great Infrastructure Boom That Wasn’t Tim Kiladze
Report on Business reporter Tim Kiladze noted that analysts had suggested that investors were far too optimistic about the extent to which public stimulus funding would boost the fortunes and bottom lines of the construction industry. Kiladze quotes a market analyst as follows: “Very few meaningful stimulus-related infrastructure projects were launched in 2009. In fact, somewhat ironically, some infrastructure spending was actually delayed … as [provincial, state and local] governments awaited funding from the federal stimulus coffers,” noted CIBC World Markets analyst Paul Lechem.
For the full article see:
http://investdb4.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/GAM.20101124.GIINFRASTRUCTURE1124ATL/GIStory/
For a systems explanation of why this ‘irony’ occured – predicting such a result before the fact – see the following article from August 2009. Why Cash For Clunkers Works Better Than Company Bail-Outs or Infrastructure Spending: Reach, Roles and Relationships Count in Our Results Theories
Explaining The Funding Flow ‘Success’ of Some Stimulus Strategies Over Others – Steve Montague, August 2009
February 14, 2011
In the following article Steve Montague suggests why some policy instruments get implemented more quickly and consistently than others. See: Why Cash For Clunkers Works Better Than Company Bail-Outs or Infrastructure Spending: Reach, Roles and Relationships Count in Our Results Theories.
Reach in Logic Models and Spheres of Influence
January 26, 2011
A European conference related to performance planning and reporting in the public sector has noted two important contributions made by PMN and S Montague in a paper titled ‘Three Spheres of Performance Governance: Spanning The Boundaries From Single-Organizational Focus Towards A Partnership Network’. The two important insights were noted in a paper by Petri Uusikylä and Ville Valovirta prepared for the European Group of Public Administration (EGPA) 2004 Annual Conference – Four Months After: Administering The New Europe, September 1-4, 2004, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Uusikylä and Valovirta conclude:
One of the important insights made by the Canadian public management developers… The reach describes the groups of beneficiaries, clients, users and recipients at whom the outputs are targeted. According to Montague (1998) the logic models which do not make a reference to who and where the action is taking place, suffer from three key problems. First, they lack the sensitivity to the impacts on different participant groups. There is also a great potential to confuse outputs and outcomes – the problem which we noticed already as regards the logical framework approach. Third, the account of the trade-off between the reach and the results remains often underdeveloped. Too ambitious results are often expected since the customer reach has not been identified.”
“Another great insight made by the Canadians is the division of the performance objectives and measures into three spheres of influence (Montague 2000). The first one is the operational sphere over which the managers have a direct control. The second sphere is one of behavioural change over which the managers have a direct control. Here the question is how our actions modify people’s actions. The third sphere the environment of indirect influence, affected by the change of behaviour. What the model does is that it impersonates the rather mechanistic approaches of performance management by employing the concept of reach and by acknowledging the different degrees of influence in the three spheres.” The online version of this article can be found at: http://evi.sagepub.com/content/13/4/399