Structures and functions of complex evaluation systems: comparison of six Central and Eastern European countries
| Author | Tomasz Kupiec,Dominika Wojtowicz,Karol Olejniczak |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/00208523211026964 |
| Published date | 01 March 2023 |
| Date | 01 March 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Structures and functions of
complex evaluation
systems: comparison of six
Central and Eastern
European countries
Tomasz Kupiec
University of Warsaw, Poland
Dominika Wojtowicz
Kozminski University, Poland
Karol Olejniczak
SWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities, Poland
Abstract
Evaluation practice is vit al for the accountabilit y and learning of administr ations imple-
menting complex policies. This ar ticle explores the relationships bet ween the struc-
tures of the evaluation system s and their functions. The find ings are based on a
comparative analysis of six national systems executing eval uation of the European
UnionCohesionPolicy.Thestudyidentifies three types of evaluation system st ructure:
centralized with a single eva luation unit, decentraliz ed with a coordinating body and
decentralized without a coo rdinating body. These systems differ in terms of the
thematic focus of evaluations an d the targeted users. Decentr alized systems focus on
internal users of knowledg e and produce mostly operational st udies; their primary
function is inward-oriented le arning about smooth programme imple mentation.
Centralized systems fulfil a more str ategic function, recognizing t he external audience
and external accountabil ity for effects.
Corresponding author:
Tomasz Kupiec, University of Warsaw –Centre for European Regional and Local Studies, Krakowskie
Przedmieście 30, 00-927 Warsaw, Poland.
Email: tomasz.kupiec@uw.edu.pl
Article
International
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
International Review of Administrative
Sciences
2023, Vol. 89(1) 202–220
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/00208523211026964
journals.sagepub.com/home/ras
Points for practitioners
Practitioners who design multi-organizational evaluation systems should bear in mind
that their structure and functions are interrelated. If both accountability and learning
are desired, the evaluation system needs at least a minimum degree of decentralization
on the one hand and the presence of an active and independent coordination body on
the other.
Keywords
accountability, cohesion policy, evaluation, evaluation systems, evaluation functions,
learning, structures
Introduction
Evaluation, defined as a systematic inquiry of the worth and merit of public interventions
(Fournier, 2005; Patton, 2004), has been considered a crucial element of the policy cycle
and public administration practice for at least several decades (Chelimsky and Shadish,
1997). Its roots can be traced to the United States’War on Poverty and Great Society
initiatives in the 1960s (Mark et al., 2006; Rossi et al., 2004). The subsequent waves
of public management reforms, including performance-based management promoted
by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the World Bank
(Kusek and Rist, 2004; OECD, 1998), institutionalized evaluation within governments
and made it a ubiquitous practice across public administrations (Furubo et al., 2002;
Stockmann et al., 2020).
In Europe, the European Union (EU) has been the major promoter of evaluation prac-
tice in public administrations at various levels. While some EU Member States have
developed their own evaluation culture, during what is often referred to as the first and
second evaluation wave (Derlien, 1990), many others, including all those joining the
EU in the twenty-first century, adopted this practice mainly in response to the require-
ments of EU regulations.
The ultimate and general goal of evaluation is ‘social betterment’(Henry and Mark,
2003). In the practice of specific organizations, evaluation translates into various func-
tions (also called purposes), often driven by conflicting logic, and therefore leading to
potential tensions among the actors in policy systems (Donaldson et al., 2010). Thus,
it is important for both the theory and practice of evaluation in public administration
to recognize the functions underlying specific evaluation efforts and to identify their
determinants.
The vast majority of evaluation use literature focuses on a single evaluation study as
the unit of analysis (Højlund, 2014; Raimondo, 2018) and misses the wider institutional
context. Only a handful of authors examine evaluation systems in terms of multi-
organizational networks (Olejniczak, 2013; Stockmann et al., 2020), but they do not
explore, in a comparative manner, the relation between structural arrangements and
system functions. Some studies suggest that there might be a relationship between
Kupiec et al. 203
To continue reading
Request your trial