Thinking with complexity in evaluation: A case study review
| Author | Graham Brown,Virginia Lewis,Nora Shields,Chris Roche,Samantha Clune |
| DOI | 10.1177/1035719X211008263 |
| Published date | 01 September 2021 |
| Date | 01 September 2021 |
| Subject Matter | Academic Articles |
2021, Vol. 21(3) 146 –162
https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X211008263
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1035719X211008263
journals.sagepub.com/home/evj
Thinking with complexity
in evaluation: A case
study review
Chris Roche
Institute for Human Security, La Trobe University
Graham Brown
Centre for Social Impact, University of NSW
Australian Research Centre in Sex, Health and Society La Trobe University
Samantha Clune
Australian Institute of Primary Care and Ageing, La Trobe University
Nora Shields
College of Science, Health and Engineering, La Trobe University
Virginia Lewis
Australian Institute of Primary Care and Ageing, La Trobe University
Abstract
Adopting complexity thinking in the design, implementation and evaluation of
health and social development programmes is of increasing interest. Understanding
institutional contexts in which these programmes are located directly influences shaping
and eventual uptake of evaluations and relevant findings. A nuanced appreciation
of the relationship between complexity, institutional arrangements and evaluation
theory and practice provides an opportunity to optimise both programme design
and eventual success. However, the application of complexity and systems thinking
Corresponding author:
Samantha Clune, Australian Institute for Primary Care & Ageing, La Trobe University, Melbourne, VIC
3086 Australia.
Email: s.clune@latrobe.edu.au
1008263
EVJ0010.1177/1035719X211008263Evaluation Journal of AustralasiaClune et al.
research-article
2021
Academic Article
,
Clune et al. 147
2 Evaluation Journal of Australasia 00(0)
within programme design and evaluation is variously understood. Some understand
complexity as the multiple constituent aspects within a system, while others take a
more sociological approach, understanding interactions between beliefs, ideas and
systems as mechanisms of change. This article adopts an exploratory approach to
examine complexity thinking in the relational, recursive interactions between context
and project design, implementation and evaluation. In doing so, common terms will
be used to demonstrate the nature of shared aspects of complexity across apparently
different projects.
Keywords
complexity, evaluation, health service programme, project design, social
development programme
Introduction
The linked processes of programme design, implementation and evaluation are inte-
gral parts of service delivery for health service and social development projects
(Pawson & Tilley, 1997). The intricacies of health and social development projects
also require engagement with the project components, context and people (Sheikh
et al., 2011). Every project is embedded in social and political realities, influenced by
cultural frames, which contribute to project outcomes and related success (Sheikh
et al., 2011). This inherent complexity has led to some describing health and social
development interventions as complex adaptive systems (Braithwaite et al., 2017),
that is, systems with ‘a large number of mutually interactive parts, often open to the
environment, which self-organise their internal structure and their dynamics with
novel and sometimes surprising macroscopic (emergent) properties’ (Ramalingam,
2013, p. 141). There have been increasing calls for researchers, evaluators and practi-
tioners to adopt complexity thinking when designing, implementing and evaluating
health service and social development interventions given their inherent complexity
(Braithwaite et al., 2018; Castellani et al., 2015; Greenhalgh & Papoutsi, 2018;
Kannampallil et al., 2011; Rutter et al., 2017).
Literature review
The application of complexity thinking in programme design and evaluation is vari-
ously understood by researchers and practitioners (Damschroder et al., 2017;
Greenhalgh & Papoutsi, 2018; Mowles, 2014; Ramalingam et al., 2008; Walton,
2014). Complexity thinking is an ontological position that understands the world as
systemic, path-dependent, sensitive to context, emergent and episodic (Boulton et al.,
2015; Mason, 2008). Some argue that many applications of complexity thinking do
not adequately capture the effect of multiple interactions between agents and levels. In
particular, some agent-based modelling tends to work on the basis of simple rules
applied to individual actors which are dependent on the behaviour of their near
To continue reading
Request your trial