Evaluating the performance, isn\'t as simply as looking at the structure. We need to understand them in multiple dimesnions with specific analysis of the content following through the ties.

1. Network Impact:The SSHRC Grant - Before and After Lewis, Holbrook and Wixted

2. Our work on networks …. Holbrook and Wixted were asked to do a workshop on evaluating health of population networks circa Oct 2007. An interesting idea, we had both worked on research program evaluations but ‘networks’? Many countries (Canada first amongst them) fund research networks for multiple purposes, incl. geographical coverage, critical mass and stakeholder involvement. See Salazar & Holbrook 2007.

5. Network Impact? But really co-publications doesn’t evaluate the whole network What’s the link between co-publication and network performance? What is network performance? Network governance model provided by Creech on international development networks and Milward & Provan on various inter-org networks provides one insight. Governance Lifecycle, sustainability, planning, oversight etc….. Not completely satisfactory but that was the Literature

6. The Workshop At the workshop we asked participants to develop indicators across a range of sectoral groups, researchers, community etc…. What they came back with surprised me …. but the there was a distinct pattern to the answers.

7. Network Typologies

8. A new window Significance of researcher and stakeholder and communities Each with a different logic and coherence In the health environment; the possibility of NGOs as organising entities in the stakeholder universe. (They are major funders of medical research) The model was partly explanatory The environment could affect performance Performance could across time affect the environment…

9. Stakeholder universe

10. The Capturing Impact Grant:and Actor Network Theory Not my field (insights by Lewis & Cressman) Arcane but relevant – Networks are constructed (not static structures) Actor Network Theory Enrollment (are researchers / stakeholders enrolled) Global/local linkages (was there a network or clichés) Technology (was there a network or clichés) obligatory passage points (is the network a go to organ) Problematization(inclusion / exclusion) system builders

11. Structure and Strategy So now we have a set of possible structures Our network environment typologies And we have a strategy & evaluation points ANT analysis as a lens on strategy tells us much about the success of the network acting within its environment But what we still needed ‘something’ to close the circle What of the likelihood of macro change in the environment?

12. Policy Networks Recently we came across policy network literature It already has a ‘stakeholder universe’ concept Has active and non active sectors but not Our fragmented / cohesive blocs But it does offer observations about the likelihood of policy change under a number of network scenarios. These scenarios can be modified to network activity.

13. Theory Development Wixted/Holbrook Environment Cressman, Holbrook et.al. ANT Strategy Inter-org research Governance SNA – internal coherence Importance of experience Holbrook etal Towards more an Evaluation framework Policy Nets prediction

14. Looking back Outputs: 3 working papers Presentations to Quad Agencies & CSPC 2009 Outcomes: Members of the Valgen team interested in using our concepts CIHR Emerging Team grant application may use our framework to suggest evaluation measures The conceptual framework for an unrelated RDI Impact: ?

15. Going Forward Each of four completely different literatures provide a component, each having limitations but each reinforces the others. Now we need to build some methodologies and conduct some field testing…..