Embedding evaluation in non-profit organisations: Lessons from evaluation advocates
| Published date | 01 December 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X231179256 |
| Author | Alison Rogers,Amy Gullickson |
| Date | 01 December 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Academic Article |
Academic Article
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
2023, Vol. 23(4) 176–204
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1035719X231179256
journals.sagepub.com/home/evj
Embedding evaluation in
non-profit organisations:
Lessons from evaluation
advocates
Alison Rogersand Amy Gullickson
Assessment and Evaluation Research Centre, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of
Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Abstract
Integrating evaluation initiatives in organisations as part of routine operations to
support organisational learning and development can be difficult; extant literature lacks
detail on the factors enhancing sustainability. This article presents research undertaken
with evaluation advocates attempting to embed evaluation in their Australian non-
profit organisations. The research involved interviewing seventeen participants, four of
whom also were the focus of organisational case studies. The researchers used social
interdependence theory to understand participants’strategies for embedding evalu-
ation and found that some elements of cooperative teamwork were more prominent
than others. Participants in high hierarchical positions, or those who had influence,
worked intentionally and incorporated strategies that aligned with all five elements.
Examples of those strategies and their use in context presented herein may help leaders
and internal and external evaluators increase the likelihood of embedding evaluation in
organisational systems.
Corresponding author:
Alison Rogers, PhD, Honorary Research Fellow, Assessment and Evaluation Research Centre, Melbourne
Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne, 100 Leicester St, Melbourne, AU-VIC,
Australia.
Email: rogersa2@unimelb.edu.au
Keywords
evaluation advocates, evaluation mainstreaming, evaluation sustainability, cooperative
teamwork, social interdependence theory, non-profit organisations
What we already know:
·Integrating evaluation initiatives in organisations as part of routine
operations to support organisational learning and development can be
difficult.
·Social interdependence theory provides a recipe for positive group
dynamics which can result in a productive group work and contribute to
making evaluation meaningful.
·Evaluation advocates are non-evaluators working towards embedding
evaluation in the organisational system.
The original contribution the article makes to theory and/
or practice:
·Evaluation advocates in high hierarchical positions, or those who had
influence, worked intentionally, and incorporated strategies that aligned
with all five elements of social interdependence theory to increase the
likelihood of embedding evaluation in their organisational systems.
·Examples of those strategies and their use in context may help leaders
and internal and external evaluators increase the likelihood of
embedding evaluation in organisational systems.
Introduction
Evaluation has been connected to organisational learning; evaluative inquiry is a form
of organisational learning that connects personal and team level growth and devel-
opment (Preskill & Torres, 1999). Although evaluation can be defined and undertaken
in different ways, it is generally initiated for reasons linked to reporting and decision-
making purposes for improvement or an assessment of quality and value (Davidson,
2005). This research used a definition of evaluation that encompasses options for what
evaluation in organisations could involve in a particular context; it covers evaluation of
strategic goals, the evaluation of programs and services, and includes the development
of systems for learning and improvement (Rogers & Williams, 2006). When evaluation
is relevant, meaningful, and useful for people working in non-profit organisations it can
Rogers and Gullickson 177
To continue reading
Request your trial