Abstract
A host of reasons exist for the pursuit of evidence in the public sector, including to support good governance and policy development. As the expectations for evaluation from policymakers have evolved, so too has evaluation practice and a great deal of experimentalism has ensued. There is a risk that these developments, and the inherent complexity within them, may lead to conflicting expectations about why evaluation is done or even a loss of purpose. This prompts the meso-level analysis of two types of stakeholders in a governance network, explored in this chapter. This chapter presents the findings of an ongoing study which explores the perceptions of evaluators and policy implementers towards the purpose of evidence. The findings suggest evaluators and policy implementers have divergent expectations of why and how evaluation data might be used. The findings suggest that evaluators aspire to make a change and enhance the policy domains they serve, whereas policy implementers perceive evaluation as serving a more governance-/management-orientated role. The use of evaluation as a symbolic or structural mechanism also emerges, prompting opportunity for further research, for instance, to explore legitimacy and evaluation. The chapter demonstrates the complexity of both evaluation and policy, and may have implications for the twin pillars of governance and responsibility at the heart of the book. If governance and responsibility are the twin pillars of sustainability, then the complex networks of relationships, expectations, values and outcomes may need to be considered.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adelman, C. (1996). Anything goes: Evaluation and relativism. Evaluation, 2(3), 291–305.
Ali, M. A. (2017). Stakeholder salience for stakeholder firms: An attempt to reframe an important heuristic device. Journal of Business Ethics, 144(1), 153–168.
Berk, R. A., & Rossi, P. H. (1990). Thinking about program evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Barbier, J. (1999). Inter-governmental evaluation: Balancing stakeholders’ expectations with enlightenment objectives. Evaluation, 5(4), 373–385.
Boaz, A., & Nutley, S. M. (2003). Evidence-based policy and practice. In T. Bovaird & E. Loeffler (Eds.), Public management and governance. London: Taylor and Francis.
Bovaird, T., & Davis, P. (1996). Managing on limited resources: A review of the literature. Aston Business School: Birmingham.
Bovaird, T., & Loeffler, E. (2007). Assessing the quality of local governance: A case study of public services. Public Money & Management, September 2007, pp. 293–299.
Brinkmann, S. (2013). Qualitative interviewing. New York: Oxford University Press.
Bristow, D., Carter, L., & Martin, S. (2015). Using evidence to improve policy and practice: The UK What works centres. Contemporary Social Science, 10(2), 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2015.1061688.
Castellani, B., & Hafferty, F. (2009). Sociology and complexity science: A new field of inquiry. Berlin: Springer.
CECAN—Centre for the Evaluation of Complexity Across the Nexus (2018). Policy evaluation for a complex world, Manifesto, January 2018, https://www.cecan.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2018-01/CECAN%20Policy%20Evaluation%20for%20a%20Complex%20World%281%29.pdf.
Chelimsky, E., & Shaelish, W. R. (1997). Evaluation for the 21st century: A handbook. London: Sage Publications.
Christie, C. A., & Fleischer, D. (2009). Social inquiry paradigms as a frame for the debate on credible evidence. In S. I. Donaldson, C. A. Christie, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice? London: Sage Publications.
Clarke, J. (2004). Dissolving the public realm? The logics and limits of neon-liberalism. Journal of Social Policy, 33(1), 27–48.
Crowther, D., Seifi, S., & Moyeen, A. (2017). Responsibility and governance in achieving sustainability. In D. Crowther, S. Seifi, & A. Moyeen (Eds.), The goals of sustainable development. Responsibility and Governance, Springer: Singapore.
Davies, I. C. (1999). Evaluation and performance management in government. Evaluation, 5(2), 150–159.
Donaldson, S. I., Christie, C. A., & Mark, M. M. (2009). What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice?. London: Sage Publications.
Duncan, G., & Chapman, J. (2012). Better public services: Public management and the New Zealand model. Public Policy, 7, 151–166.
Evers, A., & Ewert, B. (2012). Co-production: contested meanings and challenges for user organizations. In T. Brandsen, C. Pestoff, & B. Verschuere (Eds.), New public governance, the third sector and co-production (pp. 61–78). New York: Routledge.
Frederickson, H. G. (2005). What happened to public administration? Governance, Governance Everywhere. In E. Ferlie, L. Lynn, & C. Pollitt (Eds.), The oxford handbook of public management. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Fitzpatrick, J., Christie, C., & Mark, M. M. (2009). Evaluation in action. London: Sage Publications Limited.
Giannone, D. (2016). Neoliberalization by evaluation: Explaining the making of neoliberal evaluative state. PARTECIPAZIONE e CONFLITTO: The Open Journal of Sociopolitical Studies.
Gilbert, N. (2017). Evaluating complexity. Evaluator, Spring, 2017, 5–7.
Glendinning, C., Powell, M., & Rummery, K. (2002). Partnerships, new labour and the governance of welfare. Bristol: Policy Press.
Hansson, F. (2006). Organizational use of evaluations: governance and control in research evaluation. Evaluation, 12(2), 159–178.
Haynes, P. (2008). Complexity theory and evaluation in public management. Public Management Review, 19(3), 401–419.
Head, B. W. (2008). Three lenses of evidence-based policy. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 67(1), 1–11.
Henkel, M. (1991). The new evaluative state. Public Administration, 69, 121–136.
Huebner, A. J., & Betts, S. C. (1999). Examining fourth generation evaluation: Application to positive youth development. Evaluation, 5(3), 340–358.
Husbands, C. (2007). Evaluating complex public policy programmes: reflections on evaluation and governance from the evaluation of children’s trusts. Dilemmas of Engagement, Evaluation and the New Public Management, Advances in Program Evaluation, 10, 53–65.
Iriti, J. E., Bickel, W. E., & Nelson, C. A. (2005). Using recommendations in evaluation: A decision-making framework for evaluator. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(4), 464–479.
Jones, B., Kavanagh, D., Morgan, M., & Norton, P. (2007). Politics UK (6th ed.). Pearson Education Limited: Essex.
Kettl (2005). British Politics: A beginners guide. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.
Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Governance and governance networks in Europe. Public Management Review, 10(4), 505–525.
McCoy, M., & Hargie, O. D. W. (2001). Evaluating evaluation: Implications for assessing quality. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 14(7), 317–327.
McKie, L. (2003). Rhetorical spaces: Participation and pragmatism in the evaluation of community health work. Evaluation, 9(3), 303–323.
Meek, J. W. (2014). Complexity theory and administrative learning—Adaptive practices in complex governance systems. Emergence: Complexity and Organization Editorial, 16(1), 1–6.
Morrell, J. A. (2010). Evaluation in the face of uncertainty, anticipating surprise and responding to the inevitable. New York, NY: Guildford Press.
National Audit Office. (2013). Evaluation in Government, Report, https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/10331-001-Evaluation-in-government_NEW.pdf.
Newcomer, K. (1997). ‘Using Performance measurement to improve public and non-profit programs’, New Directions for Program Evaluation, 75. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Neville, B. A., Bell, S. J., & Whitwell, G. J. (2011). Stakeholder salience revisited: Refining, redefining, and refuelling an underdeveloped conceptual tool. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 357–378.
Osborne, S. (2000). Public-private partnerships: Theory and practice in international perspective. London: Routledge.
Parkhurst, J. (2017). The politics of evidence: From evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge Studies in Governance and Public Policy. Routledge: Abingdon, Oxon, UK.
Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage Publications.
Picciato, R. (1999). Towards an economics of evaluation. Evaluation, 5(1), 7–22.
Plottu, B., & Plottu, E. (2009). Approaches to participation in evaluation: Some conditions for implementation. Evaluation, 15(3), 343–359.
Sanderson, I. (2000). Evaluation in complex policy systems. Evaluation, 6(4), 433–454.
Scriven, M. (1996). The theory behind practical evaluation. Evaluation, 2(4), 393–404.
Scriven, M. (1980). The logic of evaluation. Inverness, CA: Edgepress.
Seppanen-Jarbela, R. (2003). Internal evaluation of a management-development initiative: a public sector case. Journal of Management Development, 24(1), 45–56.
Sparrow, J. G. (2017). Modern Jordan. Abingdo, UK: Routledge.
Shaw, I. (1999). Qualitative evaluation. London: Sage Publications.
Shaw, I., & Faulkner, A. (2006). Practitioner evaluation at work. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(1), 44–63.
Stecher, B. M., & Davis, W. A. (1988). How to focus an evaluation (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Stern, E. (2008). Evaluation: Critical for whom and connected to what? Evaluation, 14(2), 249–257.
Taylor, D. (2005). Governing through evidence: Participation and power in policy evaluation. Journal of Social Policy, 34(4), 601–618.
Thacker, A. (2000). Toppling masonry and textual space: nelson’s pillar and spatial politics in ulysses. Irish Studies Review, 8(2), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/713674244.
Theisens, H., Hooge, E., & Waslander, S. (2016). Steering dynamics in complex education systems. An agenda for empirical research. European Journal of Education, 51(4), 463–477.
Tompa, E., Culyer, A. J., & Dolinschi, R. (2008). Economic evaluation of interventions for occupational health and safety: Developing good practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Walton, M. (2016). Setting the context for using complexity theory in evaluation: boundaries, governance and utilisation. Evidence & Policy, 12(1), 73–89.
Weiss, C. H. (1972). Evaluation research. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs: NJ.
Weiss (1993). Where politics and evaluation research meet. Evaluation Practice, 14(1), 93–106.
Wond, T. (2017). Trust matters: Distrust in an external evaluation of a public sector program. International Journal of Public Administration, 40(5), 408–415.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wond, T. (2019). Evaluation for What Purpose? Findings From Two Stakeholder Groups. In: Crowther, D., Seifi, S., Wond, T. (eds) Responsibility and Governance. Approaches to Global Sustainability, Markets, and Governance. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1047-8_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1047-8_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1046-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1047-8
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)