01 Om At Training W Kshop Definition B


Published on

An introduction to Outcome Mapping.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

01 Om At Training W Kshop Definition B

  1. 1. An Introduction Julius N Nyangaga and Charles Warria
  2. 2. Broad definition - OM focuses on immediate changes the project wishes to initiate or establish… Changes to influence realization of desired impacts - Outcomes = transformation in behaviour, relationships, activities, actions of people, groups, and organizations that program targets - OM thus = a way or an approach to project planning, monitoring and evaluation that maps, supports the development of and captures desired outcomes (changes) as they unfold
  3. 3. Why the OM approach? - From research outputs, to adoption, outcomes and impacts … team <ul><li>Scope of work </li></ul><ul><li>Actor diversity </li></ul><ul><li>Local and global adaptability </li></ul><ul><li>Diverse physical and socio-economical factors </li></ul>There is increasing AND!! changing problem definition
  4. 4. Why the OM approach? - From research to adoption, outcomes and impacts … team … How far should a research team stretch and work to achieve objectives?
  5. 5. Why the OM approach? - No one delivers outcomes alone. In all R & D efforts many other players and events play key roles… Researchers testing and adoption Adaptation and wider scaling problem identification, exploring solutions Working partnerships
  6. 6. What is unique? - OM requires engagement with partners in relationships that support behavioural transformation leading to outcomes indicating progress towards impact OM does not focus on ATTRIBUTION and IMPACT!!!
  7. 7. What is unique?
  8. 8. Other approaches Other multi-stakeholder P, M & E Processes: - Results-based Management - Learning Systems Methodology - Soft Systems Methodology - Participatory Learning and Action - Participatory Rural Appraisal - Rapid Appraisal of Agricultural Knowledge Systems Karin Verstralen, September 2005 - Logical Framework Analysis
  9. 9. Other approaches Log frame analysis Narrative Summary Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Important Assumptions Defines project structure, distinguishing between Activities, Inputs, Outputs, Purpose and Goal Emphasis on value of indicators of achievement. Subject to measurement, or qualitative judgement, or both How and from what sources of information each indicator (VI) will be quantified or assessed. Consider practicality and cost Important assumptions on which the success of the project depends . Risks considered
  10. 10. Other approaches Log frame analysis Longer term changes in people or organisations (using the immediate project outputs), or changes in others they have subsequently interacted with LFA Goals and Outcomes Large-scale ultimate development changes (economic, political, social or environmental) which the program hopes to contribute. Described in form of (ideal) behaviour of actors in the system OM Vision
  11. 11. Other approaches Log frame analysis Changes in people, organisations who have used those project outputs (goods or services) . Project hopes to influence these (and learn about how it can have influence) LFA Purpose level changes (outcomes) Outcome Challenge: The ultimate, most ideal change as result of project actvities. Progress Markers: Gradual, transformational change, starting from what current situation. OM Challenges and Progress markers
  12. 12. Other approaches Log frame analysis Activities of the project (if services), or their results (if goods), that people and organisations outside the project can use, e.g. workshops, reports, publications, trainings, etc. LFA Outputs <ul><li>What the Project WILL DO to influence desired changes in the Partner along the Progress Markers identified. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Aimed at Partner </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Aimed at Partner’s environment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cause, Persuade, Support </li></ul></ul>OM Strategy (or Activities) Map
  13. 13. Other approaches Log frame analysis Some misgivings about LFA Long, complex, unreadable sentences Result of compromises between different parties negotiating the contents of the LFA. Sometimes the result of people not knowing that the whole story does not need to be told in one sentence Narrative statements without people in them, e.g &quot;Rice productivity increased&quot; Unreadable, ... Somehow People left out. Lots of abstract and disembodied processes.
  14. 14. Other approaches Log frame analysis Some misgivings about LFA Insistence on only ONE Purpose level statement ONE Purpose and One Goal pushes a very linear model of reality . It does not even allow for any parallel but convergent events
  15. 15. Conclusion <ul><li>Outcome Mapping helps a program </li></ul><ul><li>be specific about actors to target </li></ul><ul><li>the changes expected, </li></ul><ul><li>strategies to be employed and, as a result, </li></ul><ul><li>be more effective in terms of results to be achieved. </li></ul><ul><li>Valuable for programs whose results and achievements CANNOT be understood with quantitative indicators ALONE but which require qualitative , contextuali z ed story of development process </li></ul>