Evaluation Methods / Méthodes d'évaluation
Permanent URI for this community
Browse
Browsing Evaluation Methods / Méthodes d'évaluation by Title
Now showing 1 - 20 of 94
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Accountability framework for technological innovation(2010-02) Whitty, BrendanTo become accountable, research managers of organizations conducting R&D must identify and balance the interests of a range of stakeholders. This brief identifies paths and strategies to guide research managers through difficult decisions. Accountability processes need to be embedded in day-to-day functioning and the culture of the organization. Researchers face multiple tensions and choices: whose interests are priorities? What is relevant to the beneficiaries? Are donor agendas aligned with the beneficiaries and/or the researchers organizations? This brief aims to analyze frameworks for accountability and addresses important how-to questions.Item Accountability of Innovation - A literature review, framework and guidelines to strengthen accountability of organisations engaged in technological innovation(2010-02) Whitty, Brendan; Gersten, Julie; Poskakukhina, YuliaTechnological advances in fields such as health care, food security and clean energy offer vital solutions to the chronic problems facing human society today. Innovation is a key element of progress and improvement in the quality of life of people across the world. Yet since the Second World War there has been a significant change in the understanding of how technological innovation happens, and how technological innovation in different sectors can be improved. Literature and practice reveals in particular a growing awareness of the need when innovating to take into account a wider group of stakeholders, including the users, as well as a range of social, economic and cultural factors. It is vital therefore to be much more widely accountable and responsive. This paper synthesises some of the most important lessons learned arising from this new understanding of innovation, and provides a framework of accountability for organisations engaged in technological research and development. The guidelines focus on supporting organisations to become more effective, while simultaneously ensuring that they adhere to ethical standards in their innovation. Working towards principles of accountability in the innovation process including engagement with external stakeholders, evaluation, and communicating with them, helps to ensure their ongoing cooperation, acceptance and productive use of often complex technological and scientific innovations beyond the narrow group of experts. Starting from a literature review, the paper presents a set of guidelines which are designed to assist a research manager reflect on their accountability. It provides options and principles, rooted in the literature, which can help them address the processes and consider organisational change. The briefing paper is accordingly split into three main parts. The first articulates a theory of accountability, distinguishing between accountability which serves an ethical purpose and accountability which makes an organisation more effective. The second covers the literature addressing the new understanding of innovation, and analyses it for the relevance to accountability. The third part offers a set of guidelines, structured around distinct processes common to most organisations – strategic planning, project identification and design, conducting the research, and then concluding the research process.Item Accountability principles for policy oriented research organisations : a guide to the framework and online database(One World Trust, London, GB, 2011) Hammer, Michael; Whitty, BrendanAfter years of empirical research and collaborative engagement with a wide variety of organisations, the accountability framework supports research organisations’ ability to respond, in a structured way, to the challenges of increasing attention and demands for accountability. The Accountability Principles for Research Organisations (APRO) explores the meaning and use of concepts of accountability among organisations that conduct research which are influential in the formation of public policy. The accountability framework identifies core principles, work processes and types of stakeholders that are relevant to all policy-oriented research organisations.Item Accountability Principles for Research Institutes: On-line Forum Report, Feb-Mar 2008(2008) Whitty, BrendanThe on-line forum which invited responses to the questions: (1) To whom are research organisations in developing countries accountable? (2) What is the nature of their accountability? This paper summarises the responses to the questions. The forum participants drew on their own experience and that of their research to propose the existence of a number of “ideal types” of research organisation, each of which has its own stakeholder profile. Acknowledging, however, that the diversity of research organisations defies easy classification, the participants teased out some of the dilemmas facing research organisations in defining and balancing the demands and level of engagement to different groups of stakeholders. They also proposed accountability mechanisms and approaches by which research organisations can best resolve these dilemmas.Item Accountability principles for research organisations(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, BrendanThe book encompasses motivations for organisational accountability, drawing on four central principles of: participation, evaluation, transparency, and feedback. It explores the tensions and constraints facing different types of organisations. For research organisations, it describes key stakeholders who should be consulted; it reviews key methods which will enable a research organisation to be more accountable, and discusses practical issues and tensions in their implementation. The study develops an ‘ideal’ holistic set of principles for accountability based on principles and arguments of effectiveness, both the normative and instrumental justifications for accountability.Item Accountability Principles for Research Organisations (APRO), phase II : putting the principles into practice(One World Trust, London, GB, 2009) One World TrustThis one-page brief outlines the objectives of Accountability Principles for Research Organizations (APRO) to improve the accountability of research organisations working in developing countries. This can be achieved by testing practical processes and tools derived from the first phase of APRO, building their credibility, and disseminating them amongst research organisations thereby facilitating their uptake. The first phase of APRO formulated a framework which views accountability through four key principles: transparency, participation, evaluation and feedback management.Item Accountability principles for research organisations : a framework to understand and implement accountability good practices for research organisations working in developing countries; executive summary(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, BrendanItem Accountability principles for research organisations : final technical report; the journey(One World Trust, GB, 2012-02) Hammer, MichaelEvidence is critical in the formulation and communication of public policy. Policy-oriented research reflects not only a government’s or intergovernmental organization’s recognition of issues, and potential ways to address them, but also determines flows of public funds, progress on a range of connected policy issues, and the shape and form of programs that affect peoples’ lives. The final framework for accountability processes promotes principles of accountability most useful for informing the structuring of relationships with stakeholders, such as duties that may arise in explicit and tacit relationships, and measuring openness to change and innovation rather than ‘performance.’Item Accountability principles for research organisations : toolkit(One World Trust, London, GB, 2008) Whitty, BrendanItem Addressing accountability in NGO advocacy: Practice, principles and prospects of self-regulation(2010-03) Hammer, Michael; Rooney, Charlotte; Warren, ShanaBased on a world-wide survey of civil society self-regulatory initiatives, this paper examines how non-governmental organizations (NGO) have begun to address the accountability challenges they face when engaging in advocacy, and explains some of the strengths and weaknesses of existing self-regulation. The briefing identifies a set of initial good practice principles for advocacy organisations for each major dimension of accountability. Questions and concerns about whether an organisation indeed contributes to the public benefit have often been confused with the issue of how to assess and measure the impact of particular policy advocacy activities.Item Aplicación de RQ+ 4 Co-Pro(2024) McLean, Robert; Carden, Fred; Aiken, Alice; Bray, Judy; Cassidy, ChristineRQ+ 4 Co-Pro puede apoyar el diseño, la gestión y la evaluación de la coproducción en la investigación. Puede utilizarse en cualquier fase del ciclo de vida de la coproducción.Item Application de RQ+ 4 Co-Pro(2024) McLean, Robert; Carden, Fred; Aiken, Alice; Bray, Judy; Cassidy, ChristineRQ+ 4 Co-Pro peut soutenir la conception, la gestion et l’évaluation de la coproduction de recherche. Le cadre s’applique à chaque stade du cycle de vie de la coproduction. Ce document présente les cas d’application dans une infographie.Item Applying RQ+ 4 Co-Pro(2024) McLean, Robert; Carden, Fred; Aiken, Alice; Bray, Judy; Cassidy, ChristineRQ+ 4 Co-Pro can support the design, management and evaluation of research co-production. It can be used at any stage of the co-production life-cyle. This document presents the RQ+ 4 Co-Pro use cases in an infographic.Item Assessing Organizational Performance - Level 1- International Development Research Centre(2007-03) Rojas, Katrina; Lusthaus, CharlesThe evaluation framework is able to reflect how well an organization carries out programming work, as well as how its various systems and resources provide organizational capacity that supports performance. Performance is defined in terms of effectiveness (mission fulfilment), efficiency, ongoing relevance (the extent to which the organization adapts to changing conditions in its environment), and financial viability. The evaluation method acknowledges the context /factors that facilitate or impede performance capacity. The presentation provides a framework and learning module for the organizational assessment process.Item Calidad de Investigacion Plus (RQ+) : evaluando la investigación de manera diferente(2022) McLean, Robert; Ofir, Zenda; Etherington, Amy; Acevedo, Manuel; Feinstein, OsvaldoLa ciencia y la innovación ofrecen una inmensa promesa para el desarrollo sostenible global. La capacidad de los investigadores e innovadores para combinar la creatividad y el pensamiento crítico ha sido la fuerza impulsora detrás de muchos de nuestros mayores logros. Como resultado, estamos viviendo vidas más largas y saludables; hemos iluminado un profundo cambio social; y hemos creado redes que nos conectan alrededor de la Tierra con un dispositivo de mano. Pero la ciencia como fuerza para el bien no puede darse por sentada. En este documento, argumentaremos que la experiencia del Centro Internacional de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo (IDRC) con RQ+ muestra una promesa significativa. Elaboramos esta posición al presentar una aplicación de RQ+ en 2020-21 sobre diversas carteras de investigación financiadas por el IDRC, y siendo un equipo de financiadores, investigadores, evaluadores, profesionales y estudiantes, ofrecemos RQ+ como una alternativa validada para definir, gestionar y evaluar la calidad de la investigación.Item Calidad de Investigación Plus (RQ+) : RQ+ de un vistazo(2022) McLean, Robert; Ofir, Zenda; Etherington, Amy; Acevedo, Manuel; Feinstein, OsvaldoItem Calidad de investigación Plus (RQ+) : un enfoque integral para evaluar la investigación(IDRC, Ottawa, ON, 2017) Ofir, Zenda; Schwandt, Thomas; Duggan, Colleen; McLean, RobertEn este informe se describen en primer lugar los motivos por los que implementamos esta nueva estrategia para evaluar la calidad de investigación. A continuación, se analiza en detalle el instrumento de evaluación en sí mismo, seguido por una sección con lecciones aprendidas a partir del primer intento de implementación del mismo en un conjunto de Revisiones Externas. En resumen, el informe reflexiona sobre los usos potenciales del instrumento y sobre ideas para su futuro mejoramiento. Lo que se presenta aquí es la versión inicial del Marco de Referencia RQ+, que se encuentra en proceso de revisión por IDRC a fin de ser adaptado a sus circunstancias y usos específicos. Se invita a los lectores —tanto a investigadores que evalúan la calidad de investigación como a quienes financian las investigaciones— a tratar a este Marco de Referencia como una herramienta dinámica y en evolución, que pueden adaptar y modificar para sus propios propósitos.Item Calidad de investigación plus para la coproducción (RQ+ 4 Co-Pro) : instrumento de evaluación - una herramienta práctica y holística para evaluar la calidad de la coproducción de investigación(2024) McLean, Robert; Carden, Fred; Aiken, Alice; Bray, Judy; Cassidy, ChristineEste documento presenta el instrumento de evaluación RQ+ 4 Co-Pro. El instrumento de evaluación proporciona orientación, descriptores detallados, tablas de registro e incluye rúbricas que facilitarán el uso del marco RQ+ 4 Co-Pro en una evaluación de coproducción de investigación. Se trata de una herramienta de libre acceso que los usuarios pueden adaptar a sus objetivos y contextos.