Be the first to like this
"This study reviews 25 practitioners’ (19 male, 6 female) views on the effectiveness of the learning process using a novel LinkedIn analysis and direct questionnaire approach. Participants worked across 22 organisations in the non-profit, for-profit sectors, government development agencies and international organisations.
"Four key findings were identified – (1) Market development practitioners consider their learning environments to be above-average; (2) Both non-use of evaluations and incorrect content of evaluations are seen as significant issues; (3) Practitioners benefit most from interactive learning and (4) Learning incentives form a better predictor of learning success than do rapid access to evaluations through a high-powered IT system." (Taken from the Exec Summary)
Noteworthy Findings shared by the author with MaFI members:
> All participants (n = 25) considered their learning environment at work to be either average or above average. Mean score = 4/5
> Both the quality of project evaluations and the method in which the results of those evaluations are disseminated were considered significant limiters on learning by respondents.
> Involvement in the evaluation process was considered of major importance for learning – and practitioners generally reported that they had the opportunity both to discuss the results of evaluations with their colleagues (76%) and to conduct reviews themselves (68%)
> Some participants lacked basic learning incentives, e.g. time allocated for learning (23%); learning being reviewed as part of the appraisal process (25%)
> Practitioners considered that although evaluations are predominantly used to satisfy donors’ administrative requirements, those donors also commonly learn from the evaluations.