Working with Heterogeneity

A Pluralist Strategy for Evaluation
  • Ann Taket
  • Leroy White


Our experience in evaluation has been that we need to find ways of working in situations which have a high degree of variety and in which acceptance and respect for difference is important. Such situations display a high degree of heterogeneity, in a number of different senses: the differences between the people involved in the situation; differences between groups; and lack of stability in the environment. In contrast, most well-established evaluation strategies expect a stable hypothesis to be under test, do not recognise more than one perception of a situation, and are based on the implicit assumption that a unitary description of reality can be offered. The starting point for the paper will be a critical analysis of a particular strategy for evaluation arising from within the systems tradition. The concept of heterogeneity will be explored and the paper will present an alternative way of approaching evaluation, which we have found particularly valuable for use where a high degree of variety exists. The pluralist strategy described is based on the acknowledgement and respect of difference, rather than its rationalisation. Elements of this strategy for evaluation will be illustrated with examples from recent work in the social policy arena.


Epistemological Belief Voluntary Sector Operational Research Society Contingency Base Approach Stable Hypothesis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Flood, R.L., and Jackson, M.C., 1991, “Creative Problem Solving: Total Systems Intervention,” John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
  2. Fox, N.J., 1991, Postmodernism, rationality and the evaluation of health care, Sociological Review. 394: 709–744.Google Scholar
  3. Gregory, A.J., 1993, Managerial problem solving and evaluation: a complementarist approach, in: “Proceedings of the Second European Congress on Systems Science,” Prague.Google Scholar
  4. Gregory, A.J., and Jackson, M.C., 1992, Evaluation methodologies: a system for use, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 43:19–28.Google Scholar
  5. Haraway, D., 1985, A cyborg manifesto: science, technology and socialist-feminism in the late twentieth century, in: “Simians, Cyborgs and Women: the Reinvention of Nature”, 1991, Free Association Books, London.Google Scholar
  6. Harnden, R., 1994, “Multimedia — a new space of expression,” Systemist, 16: 229–241.Google Scholar
  7. Jackson, M.C., 1990, Beyond a system of systems methodologies, Journal of the Operational Research Society. 41: 657–668.Google Scholar
  8. Jackson, M.C., and Keys, P., 1984, Towards a system of systems methodologies, Journal of the Operational Research Society. 35(6): 473–486.Google Scholar
  9. Legge, K., 1984, “Evaluating Planned Organisational Change,” Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  10. McCracken, J., Pretty, J., and Conway, G., 1988, “An Introduction to RRA for Agricultural Development,” IIED, London.Google Scholar
  11. Taket, A.R., 1993, Mixing and matching: OR and innovatory health promotion projects, OR Insight. 6(4): 18–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Taket, A.R., 1994, Undercover agency? — ethics, responsibility and the practice of OR. Journal of the Operational Research Society. 45(2): 123–132.Google Scholar
  13. Thompson, J.C., 1992, Program evaluation within a health promotion framework, Canadian Journal of Public Health. 83(Sup. 1): S67–S71.Google Scholar
  14. White, L.A., 1994, Development options for a rural community, International Transactions of OR in press.Google Scholar
  15. White, L.A., and Taket, A.R., 1993, Community OR — doing what feels good, OR Insight 6(2): 20–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ann Taket
    • 1
  • Leroy White
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Education and Health StudiesSouth Bank UniversityLondonUK
  2. 2.School of Mathematics, Statistics and ComputingUniversity of GreenwichLondonUK

Personalised recommendations