This was used during the 2013 Pre-Conference Training at the BDS Conference held in Mombasa, Kenya.

1. BDS
2013
Pre-­‐Conference
Training
Day
2

4. Market
Facilita<on
Concepts

5. Market
Facilita,on
What
is
it?
Is
an
ac<on
or
agent
that
s<mulates
the
market
system
to
develop
and
grow,
but
does
not
become
part
of
it
5

6. Facilita,on
Concepts
Why:
to
increase
the
compe<<veness
of
the
whole
industry
over
<me
by:
o Fostering
systemic
shiKs
towards:
§ broader
and
deeper
commercially
grounded
rela<onships
§ ongoing
innova<on/upgrading
§ benefit
flows
that
drive
shiKs
in
rela<onships
and
innova<on
o Fostering
improvement
in
cri<cal
end
market
factors
–
product,
opera<ons,
branding
How
to:
o Appropriate
intensity
(i.e.
role
and
resources
of
project)
o Foster
local
rela<onships
–
buying
down
risks
o Self
selec<on
of
project
partners
-­‐-­‐
rolling
exit
to
test
rela<onships
and
ownership
6

7. Why?
Applied
Problem
statement:
The
rice
value
chain
relies
on
smallholder
produc,on,
but
cannot
compete
because
of
the
low
produc,vity
of
par,cipa,ng
smallholders
Why
Ra,onale
Farmers
performance
is
due
to
lack
of
capacity
and
untrustworthy
private
sector
actors:
• Project
provides
output
and
input
services
directly
Ugly
Bad
Good
7

8. Why?
Applied
8
Problem
statement:
The
rice
value
chain
relies
on
smallholder
produc,on,
but
cannot
compete
because
of
the
low
produc,vity
of
par,cipa,ng
smallholders
Why
Ra,onale
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
knowledge
and
capacity
gaps
that
result
in
limited
effec<ve
rela<onships
with
output
market
actors:
• Project
assists
in
building
output
rela<onships,
• Project
provides
direct
training
to
smallholders
• Project
provides
free
or
highly
subsidized
inputs
Ugly
Bad
Good

9. Why?
Applied
9
Problem
statement:
The
rice
value
chain
relies
on
smallholder
produc,on,
but
cannot
compete
because
of
the
low
produc,vity
of
par,cipa,ng
smallholders
Why
Ra,onale
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
• Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
aggrega<on
services
• Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
• Project
works
with
radio
and
local
fes<vals
to
improve
knowledge
flows
Ugly
Bad
Good

10. Facilita,on
Concepts
Why: to increase the competitiveness of the whole industry over time by:
o Fostering systemic shifts towards:
§ broader and deeper commercially grounded relationships
§ ongoing innovation/upgrading
§ benefit flows that drive shifts in relationships and innovation
o Fostering improvement in critical end market factors – product,
operations, branding
How to:
o Appropriate intensity (i.e., role and resources of project)
o Foster local relationships – buying down risks
o Self selection of project partners -- rolling exit to test
relationships and ownership
10

11. How? Applied
11
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Intensity
• Focus
leYng
value
chain
actors
take
the
lead
• Project
takes
a
very
low
profile
by
spreading
its
par<cipa<on
between
output,
input
and
to
a
lesser
extent
smallholders
• Resources
spread
between
actors
depending
on
the
responses/willingness
of
the
actors
to
take
on
certain
behaviors
and
drive
firm
and
industry
upgrading
Bad
Better
Even Better

12. How? Applied
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Intensity
Project
takes
a
very
high
profile
with
the
smallholder
and
targets
all
resources
on
direct
services
to
the
smallholder
Bad
Better
Even Better
12

13. How? Applied
13
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Intensity
Project
takes
a
lower
profile
with
smallholders
and
output
firms,
but
will
target
resources
on
smallholder
training
and
inputs
Bad
Better
Even Better

14. How? Applied
14
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Rela,onships
§ Project
facilitates
output
rela<onships
by
fostering
effec<ve
conduct
(transparent
and
longer
term)
of
those
rela<onships
§ Project
fosters
a
business
ra<onale
and
improved
capacity
within
output
firms
to
maintain
and
scale
up
those
rela<onships
§ Project
nego<ates,
some<mes
conducts
transac<ons
with
input,
and
delivers
products
to
smallholders
Bad
Better
Even Better

15. How?
Applied
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Rela,onships
§ Project
creates
strong
and
dependent
rela<onships
with
smallholders
to
protect
them
§ Project
nego<ates
and
conducts
transac<ons
on
behalf
of
farmers
with
output
and
input
actors
Bad
Better
Even Better
15

16. How?
Applied
16
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Rela,onships
§ Project
Facilitates
output
and
input
rela<onships
by
fostering
effec<ve
conduct
of
those
rela<onships.
§ Project
fosters
a
business
ra<onale
and
improved
capacity
in
output
and
input
firms
to
maintain
and
scale
up
those
rela<onships
§ Scans
for
opportuni<es
to
include
other
support
market
actors
Bad
Better
Even Better

17. How? Applied
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Ownership
§ Project
responsible
for
output
and
input
roles
limi<ng
the
need
for
smallholders
or
other
actors
to
change
or
own
the
process
of
behavior
change
Bad
Better
Even Better
17

18. How? Applied
18
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Ownership
§ Project
facilitates
output
firms
to
own
the
behavior
changes
needed
to
develop
effec<ve
rela<onships
with
smallholders,
§ Project
limits
role/interest
of
input
firm
by
providing
direct
training
and
subsidies
on
inputs.
Bad
Better
Even Better

19. How? Applied
19
Why:
Farmer
performance
is
due
to
limited
and
ineffec<ve
rela<onships
on
the
output
and
input
sides
of
produc<on:
o Project
assists
output
firms
to
provide
market
requirements
maybe
through
improved
intermedia<on
services
o Project
assists
input
firms
to
extend
distribu<on
networks
to
the
smallholder
market
with
a
focus
on
solu<ons
(i.e.,
informa<on
and
services)
How
-­‐-­‐
Ownership
§ Project
facilitates
using
tools
to
get
all
actors
to
take
on
key
behaviors
in
order
to
access
project
support.
§ Project
puts
condi<ons
on
support
dependent
on
buy-­‐in
and
reac<on
to
ini<al
project
interven<ons.
§ Project
knowledge
management
efforts
track
closely
ownership
and
changing
behavior
to
determine
if
changes
are
needed
including
exi<ng
Bad
Better
Even Better

20. Facilita,on
Concepts
Fostering Relationships and Ownership:
o Buying Down Risks
§ Using project resources to reduce the risk of local
actors to engage in transactions/shifts in business
tactics that will lead to longer term commercial
relationships and drive upgrading
o Self Selection
§ Requires value chain actors to perform and action in
order to access project resource – the action has to
lead to ownership of a behaviour change process
20

21. Fostering
Rela,onships
Buying Down Risk:
o Foster innovation in marketing and business
tactics
o Maintain local relationship focus
o Embed subsidy to mimic real life transactions
o Clarify exit in time and resources
21

22. Fostering
Rela,onships
Buying Down Risks – How:
o Promotional events (i.e., discounts,
Cost
share
training
and
opera<onal
costs
for
new
smallholder
manger
posi<on
transports, demos, etc.)
o Internal firm upgrading/expansion
(i.e., management training, staff Cost
share
training
of
skills/internships, etc)
mid-­‐level
managers
with
Cost
share
with
buyer
large
promo<onal
event
to
explain/sell
market
opportunity
to
farmers
private
input
firms
to
promote
and
manage
rural
services
delivery
Internal
firm
upgrading
and
expansion
Promo<onal
events
Cost
share
promo<onal
discounts
and
demos
with
input
firm
to
get
farmers
to
tests
products
and
services
22

23. Fostering
Rela,onships
Buying Down Risks – How:
o Service delivery (i.e., certification
skills, equipment, research, etc.)
Assist
and
cost
share
with
input
firm
and
spraying
service
providers
a
cer<fica<on
process
for
individual
sprayers
Cost
share
research
with
ICT
firms/banks
mobile
banking
pla[orms
for
transfer
and
payment
services
Service
delivery
Cost
share
equipment
and
training
with
Rice
firm
for
service
providers
signing
exclusive
deals
for
discounts
to
their
suppliers
23

24. Fostering
Ownership
Self Selection:
o Ensuring ownership
o Setting hurdle to entrance
o Changing hurdle height as program evolves
o Using hurdles to manage rolling exits
24

25. Fostering
Ownership
Self
Selec,on
examples:
Rice
firms
has
to
has
agree
to
SH
management
and
iden<fy
specific
managers
to
ini<ate
the
program
Then
Project
assists
training
of
mid-­‐
level
managers
on
new
supply
chain
management
skills
Rice
firms
must
conduct
internal
systems
review
to
iden<fy
inefficiencies
and
informa<on
gaps
Then
Project
cost
shares
upgrading
of
system
to
support
new
SH
management
strategy
25

26. Facilita,on
• Intervening for relationships and ownership is
more art more than a science
§ Goal is to do just enough risk reduction to
foster interaction and trust investments
§ Value is really only determined when someone
demonstrates via investment/behavior change
§ Rolling exit and wait and see are important
ways to use self selection
26

27.
Incen<ves
Buying
Down
Risk
Demonstra<on
Effect
Upgrading
Crowding
In
Exit
Strategy

28.
Incen<ves
• Understanding
and
building
on
the
drivers
(interests
and
mo<va<ons)
of
the
actors
to
take
on
a
new
behaviour
(take
on
or
par<cipate
in
a
new
ac<vity)
• May
be
social,
personal,
financial,
etc.
• Agrovet
and
3rd-­‐party
support
services
want
to
grow
their
businesses
and
make
higher
profits,
by:
• developing
be`er
rela<onships
with
customers
(for
repeat
sales
from
farmers)
• reaching
new
customers
(by
selling
to
new
farmers
in
rural
areas)
• making
more
sales
(by
making
it
easier
to
order,
access
and
pay
for
their
products)

29.
Buy-­‐down
risk
• To
demonstrate
the
benefits
of
new
market
behaviours,
a
project
might
decide
to
decrease
(“buy
down”)
the
risk
of
a
market
actor
trying
out
the
new
behaviour
-­‐
using
strategic
“smart”
subsidies.
• It
may
seem
too
risky
for
the
market
actor
to
bear
the
cost
and
<me
of
taking
on
the
behaviour/ac<vity
on
their
own
for
the
first
<me
• A
cost
share
was
used
by
the
project
to
share
costs
for
the
open-­‐air
market
day
promo<onal
stalls
as
a
demonstra<on
to
agrovet
that
this
would
indeed
bring
in
more
customers
and
sales.
• The
project
covered
a
rapidly
decreasing
%
of
the
cost
of
transport
for
the
first
10
open-­‐
air
market
days

30.
Demonstra<on
Effect
• Effects
on
the
behaviour
of
individuals
or
firms
caused
by
observa<on
of
the
ac<ons
of
others
and
their
consequences
• Uses
early
behaviour
change
adopters
as
examples
/
models
• Goal:
deepen
ownership
of
behaviour
changes
in
the
value
chain
actors,
and
broaden
the
change
throughout
the
value
chain
so
that
it
becomes
a
“norm”
• Other
input
suppliers
(agrovets)
see
how
successful
the
agent
network
and
rural
market
day
promo<ons
are,
and
start
seYng
up
services
to
reach
poorer
farmers
in
rural
areas.

31.
Upgrading
Inves<ng
<me,
money
or
other
resources
into
improving
the
enterprise
-­‐
-­‐
-­‐
Process
upgrading
(new
produc<on
techniques
or
improved
technology)
Product
upgrading
(improving
the
product
or
other
product
lines)
Func<onal
upgrading
(improving
skills)
• Invested
in
new
technology
to
improve
his
business
(M-­‐PESA
payments,
cell
phone
customer
research
tool)
• Invested
in
bringing
in
new
partners
to
be
able
to
offer
a
more
sophis<cated
range
of
products
and
services
• Invested
in
improving
skills
and
buying
new
equipment
to
run
local
promo<onal
events

32.
Crowding-­‐in
• Interven<ons
catalyze
or
bring
in
other
players
and
func<ons
into
the
market
system
so
that
it
works
be`er
for
the
poor.
Can
result
in:
• Expanded
breadth
(more
transac<ons
in
the
market)
• Expanded
depth
(suppor<ng
func<ons)
• Expanded
reach
(new
areas
or
markets)
• Increasing
number
of
agrovets
may
see
the
success
of
a
business
strategy
to
target
rural
farmers,
and
start
copying
or
adap<ng
the
ac<vi<es
of
the
agrovet
• Increasing
number
of
support
service
providers
are
seeing
the
benefit
of
partnering
with
agrovets
to
target
poorer
producers
(spraying,
soil
tes<ng,
…)

33.
Exit
Strategy
• Stopping
investments
in
a
certain
ac<vity
once
a
certain
level
of
uptake
or
behaviour
change
has
been
reached.
• “Rolling
exit
strategies”
stop
cost-­‐sharing,
using
a
wait-­‐and-­‐
see
approach,
to
see
if
a
market
actor
self
selects
to
take
on
an
ac<vity
by
themselves,
showing
that
they
have
the
ownership
and
capacity
to
con<nue
without
the
project’s
support.
• The
project
stopped
cost-­‐
sharing
open-­‐air
market
day
stalls
as
the
agrovet
started
seeing
value
and
demonstrated
the
ownership,
capacity
and
means
to
take
on
the
ac<vity
• The
project
planted
the
idea
of
an
agent
network,
but
waited
to
see
if
the
agrovet
took
the
ini<al
steps
to
put
this
in
place
before
inves<ng
more
<me
and
money
into
strengthening
the
network.

34.
Incen<ves
Buying
Down
Risk
Demonstra<on
Effect
Upgrading
Crowding
In
Exit
Strategy

35.
7
Behaviour
Change
Project
Design
Principles
and
their
applica,on
to
Market
Systems
Development
Project
Design

36. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Principle
1:
• Facilitate
self-­‐control
through
commitment
devices
Challenge:
• Imbalance
between
inten<on
and
ac<on;
• difficulty
maintaining
discipline
Project
Design
Principle
• Make
the
follow
through
on
a
commitment
easier
• Iden<fy
ways
to
encourage
ac<ons
that
s<ck
to
the
plan
• Introduce
expensive
and/or
aggressive
contracts
or
penal<es

37. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Project
Design
Principle
Principle
2:
• Avoid
exacerba<ng
exis<ng
self-­‐control
problems
• Reduce
the
need
for
Self-­‐
control
• Reduce
the
need
for
people
to
exert
self-­‐control
Challenge:
• Lumpy
and/or
front-­‐ended
income
• Difficulty
managing
cash
flow

38. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Principle
3:
• Remove
Snags
to
Choosing
Challenge:
• Default
op<on
(‘do
nothing’)
is
dispropor<onately
significant
Project
Design
Principle
• Reduce
the
number
of
things
people
have
to
do
to
take
advantage
of
it
• The
default
should
align
with
the
desired
behaviour
change;
make
the
poor
have
to
opt
out
through
ac<on
–
they
have
to
ac<vely
select
not
to
do
something

39. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Principle
4:
• Use
Micro-­‐Incen,ves
Challenge:
• Small
incen<ves
are
enough
for
large
consequences
Project
Design
Principle
• Size
of
an
incen<ve
only
needs
to
be
as
large
as
the
barrier
that
caused
the
problem
• Incen<ves
are
both
economic
and
non-­‐
economic

40. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Principle
5:
• Reduce
InaOen,on:
Reminders
and
Implementa,on
Inten,ons
Challenge:
• Inten<on
to
do
something
requires
several
steps
and
so
mul<ples
possibili<es
of
forgeYng,
or
accidental
or
wilful
neglect
or
abandonment
Project
Design
Principle
• Help
people
to
remember
• Make
wilful
neglect
difficult
and
abandonment
harder
to
carry
out

41. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Principle
6:
• Maximize
the
Impact
of
Messaging:
Framing
Effects,
Social
Comparisons,
Norms
Challenge:
• Message
to
relate
the
person’s
psycho-­‐social
percep<on
on
self
to
the
intended
outcome/goal
•
•
•
•
Project
Design
Principle
Pay
a`en<on
to
both
the
benefits
of
doing
something
and
the
costs
of
not
doing
it
Create
peer
comparisons
Message
around
what
is
a
‘normal
behaviour’
Using
mul<ple
media:
informa<on
campaigns,
billboards,
le`ers,
television
or
radio
adver<sements,
and
now
personalized
messaging
through
phones

42. Behaviour
Change
Principle
Principle
7:
• Frame
Messages
to
Match
Mental
Models
Challenge:
• Exis<ng
mental
models
some<mes
stand
in
the
way
of
people
adop<ng
beneficial
investments
Project
Design
Principle
• Provide
informa<on
or
evidence
that
directly
targets
the
beliefs
at
the
core
of
the
flawed
mental
model
has
a
be`er
chance
of
success

43. Media

44. Final
media
slides
to
be
inserted
here

45. Tacit
Knowledge

46. Explicit
versus
Tacit
Knowledge
EXPLICIT
INFORMATION
• Objec<vely
verifiable
and
largely
quan<ta<ve
TACIT
INFORMATION
• Largely
qualita<ve
• Stored
in
individual's
head
or
embedded
within
culture
of
the
• Easily
transmi`ed
to
others,
stored
in
organiza<on
certain
media,
aggregated,
and
• Gained
experien<ally
and
thus
cannot
presented
in
summarized
form
be
easily
ar<culated
or
explained
to
inexperienced
par<es
• Useful
for
accountability
purposes
or
• Tacit
informa<on
held
by
field
staff
is
informing
higher-­‐level
programming
a
par<cularly
cri<cal
source
of
decisions
by
donors
and
other
informa<on
for
internal
monitoring
external
stakeholders
purposes
• Useful
for
guiding
project
management
in
complex
and
dynamic
environments

47. Scenarios
for
observing
tacit
knowledge
and
ensuring
it
is
captured,
understood,
and
shared
...

48. Results
Measurement

49. Proving and Improving Results
Proving
Results
Improving
Results
M&E
system
capable
of
credibly
demonstra<ng
programme
results
M&E
system
supports
improved
design
and
implementa<on
of
interven<ons
System
Requirements
ü Well
defined
indicators
ü Robust
measurement
tools
ü Robust
monitoring
plan
ü Baselines
ü Credible
a`ribu<on
strategy
ü Credible
aggrega<on
strategy
ü M&E
system
generates
<mely
and
relevant
informa<on
for
management
ü Knowledge
management

50. M&E in a Market Systems Context
• Market
development
programmes
explicitly
acknowledge
that
systems
are
complex
• M&E
needs
to
integrate
complexity
into
the
way
it
func<ons,
including
accommoda<ng
for:
• Formula<ng
and
tes<ng
assump<ons,
pilo<ng
interven<ons,
proceeding
by
trial
and
error
• Scaling-­‐up
interven<ons
that
work,
modifying
or
dropping
interven<ons
that
do
not
work
• Providing
credible
evidence
on
sustainability,
systemic
change
and
poverty
reduc<on

51. Implications
• Tradi<onal
approaches
to
M&E
are
insufficient
in
market
systems
context:
• Measure
results
only
at
the
middle
and
end
of
the
programme
• M&E
divorced
from
management
func<on
• M&E
system
uses
LogFrame
only
• “Evalua<on”
seen
as
an
external
ac<vity
only
• Use
of
Randomised
Control
Trials

52. Impact Profiles
High-­‐level
Impact
SCALE
SUSTAINABILITY
• Market
development
programmes
will
have
different
impact
profiles
• Can
take
1-­‐3
years
to
deliver
high-­‐level
impact
• Progress
can
be
bumpy!
Time
Project
Life,me
Market
Development
Direct
Delivery

53. Results Management Framework
• Theory
of
Change
• Results
Chains
• Monitoring
Plans

54. What is a Theory of Change?
Theories
of
Change
posit
the
underlying
causes
that
are
driving
poor
performance
and
resul<ng
limited
benefits
accruing
to
the
poor.
Theories
of
Change
then
provide
an
overview
of
the
systemic
change
needed
to
improve
performance,
with
a
specific
focus
on
how
the
poor
will
benefit
from
improved
performance.

55. Monitoring & Results Measurement Cycle
Theory
of
Change
1.
Draw
Interven<on
Results
Chain
7.
Report
Results
8.
Knowledge
Management
6.
Data
Analysis
2.
Define
Indicators
3.
Establish
Baseline
5.
Data
Collec<on
4.
Predict
Results

56. Results Chains
• Results
Chains
map
the
systemic
change
process
of
an
interven<on
• RCs
are
more
granular
and
flexible
than
LogFrames
• RCs
are
a
key
design
and
monitoring
tool
Best
Prac,ce:
• RCs
developed
jointly
by
the
M&E
team
and
interven<on
team
• Every
RC
includes
boxes
to
capture
systemic
change:
sustainability,
copying
/
crowding-­‐in

57. Results Chains: Basic Structure
Impact
on
poor
men
and
women
• Increased
incomes;
more
secure
livelihoods
• Job
crea<on
• Economic
empowerment
Enterprise
performance
• Improved
produc<vity/compe<<veness
• E.g.
improved
yields
for
small-­‐holder
farmers
System-­‐level
change
Ac<vi<es
• Improved
linkages
between
system
actors
• Improved
market
access
• Changes
in
formal/informal
rules
• Introduc<on
of
new/improved
interconnected
systems
(e.g.
policy,
inputs,
finance,
ICT)
• Programme
facilita<on
ac<vi<es

58. Build your Results Chain!

59. Small-­‐holders
apply
new
prac<ces
Small-­‐holders
access
new
services
Copying
by
non-­‐project
supported
Millers
Millers
increase
incomes
Miller
delivers
embedded
services
to
small-­‐holders
Miller
adopts
new
supply
chain
prac<ces
(incl
performance
incen<ves
and
transparent
pricing)
Project
facilitates
strategic
planning
process
on
new
supply
chain
prac<ces
Project
iden<fies
Millers
willing
to
adopt
new
supply
chain
strategy
IMPACT
ACTIVITIES
Targeted
small-­‐holders
achieve
higher
yields
&
sales
Copying
by
non-­‐targeted
Small-­‐holders
ENTERPRISE
PERFORMANCE
Targeted
small-­‐holders
increase
incomes
SYSTEM
CHANGE
SYSTEMIC
CHANGE

60. Establishing Baseline
• To
assess
change,
you
need
to
establish
a
baseline
for
each
indicator
• Common
mispercep<on
is
to
conduct
one
big
baseline
study
of
the
target
popula<on
at
the
beginning
of
the
programme
• “Treatment”
group
is
hard
to
define
at
start
• A`ribu<on
considera<ons
can
be
difficult
to
understand
at
start
• Some<mes
necessary
to
conduct
retrospec<ve
baselines
• Best
prac,ce:
targeted
baselines
conducted
for
each
interven<on,
based
on
clear
understanding
of
change
process

61. Predicting Results
• Predict
results
for
each
box
in
the
Results
Chain:
• What
change
do
you
expect?
• By
when?
• Predic<ng
results
helps
with:
• Planning
data
collec<on
• Tes<ng
the
underlying
logic
and
making
–
assump<ons
explicit
• Monitoring
progress
• Best
prac,ce:
predicted
impact
is
used
to
decide
whether
to
proceed
with
an
interven<on
or
not
–
interven<ons
that
offer
low
predicted
Value
for
Money
(VFM)
are
dropped
or
modified

62. Predicting Results: Rice Example
Average
income
increase
by
20%
for
50
Smallholders
during
first
season
Average
yields
increase
by
20%
for
50
Smallholders
during
first
season
50
Smallholders
accept
service
condi<ons
Miller
offers
services
to
200
Smallholders
during
first
season
1
Miller
adopts
new
model
Project
supports
2
Millers

63. Applying Degrees of Evidence
MSE/Household
level:
May
be
able
to
a`ribute
changes
to
project
interven<on
through
sta<s<cal
and
qualita<ve
research
Market
system
level:
Use
qualita<ve
techniques
to
determine
preponderance
of
evidence
on
effec<veness
at
market
level
Triangulate
evidence
from
all
sources

64. Summary Check-list
• M&E
system
is
capable
of
“proving”
and
“improving”
results
• Every
interven<on
has
a
clear
results
chain
• Specific
and
measureable
indicators
are
defined
for
each
box
in
the
results
chain
• Baselines
are
established
for
each
indicator
• Predicted
results
produced
for
each
interven<on
• Every
interven<on
has
a
measurement
plan,
with
appropriate
a`ribu<on
strategy
• Data
analysis
is
<mely
and
accessible
• Management
decisions
are
made
on
the
basis
of
evidence/
results
• Results
are
aggregated
(controlling
for
overlap)
and
reported
in
an
accessible
way