05.01.2015 Views

Review 3 final 2 - TAU - National Treasury

Review 3 final 2 - TAU - National Treasury

Review 3 final 2 - TAU - National Treasury

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE UNIT REVIEW | A Government with a Strategic Centre<br />

It is in such circumstances that flexible, iterative<br />

approaches, which acknowledge the actual process<br />

of change, and not only the achievement of predetermined<br />

outputs, may be more relevant. The<br />

<strong>TAU</strong> recently engaged with a team of international<br />

evaluators who did a review of the South African<br />

programmes, funded by a particular Development<br />

Partner, and we deliberated at length on this topic:<br />

“How do we ensure that our monitoring and reporting<br />

reflect the richness of what is done and achieved in<br />

our work”<br />

Our discussions on these matters forms part of a<br />

broader debate on the measurement dilemma that<br />

is taking place throughout the development and<br />

public sector world-wide. The tension between easily<br />

measurable results in the interest of accountability<br />

and control, and measurement of actual, meaningful<br />

change, in the interest of real development results,<br />

is stated rather bluntly by Natsios (2010): “…those<br />

development programs that are most precisely and<br />

easily measured are the least transformational, and<br />

those programs that are most transformational are the<br />

least measurable.”<br />

Measurement of capacity development is one of those<br />

tough dilemmas – many projects attempt to do some<br />

form of capacity development, but how is it measured<br />

A variety of options are available, and we talked to John<br />

Saxby (part of the international evaluation team) to<br />

find out more about his views on how an organisation<br />

like <strong>TAU</strong> can improve its monitoring and evaluation<br />

practice. (see article on page 19)<br />

Fia van Rensburg<br />

Technical Advisor<br />

References:<br />

Baser, H. A paper for the Cairo Workshop on Capacity Development<br />

March 28-29, 2011<br />

http://www.impactalliance.org/ev_en.phpID=51579_201&ID2=DO_<br />

TOPIC<br />

Caulkin, S. This isn’t an abstract problem. Targets can kill. The Observer,<br />

22 March 2009.<br />

Gray, A and Jenkins, B. Government and Administration: Too Much<br />

Checking, Not Enough Doing Oxford Journals. Parliamentary<br />

Afrrairs Vol. 57 No. 2, 269 – 287 © Hansard Society for Parliamentary<br />

Government 2004.<br />

Natsios, A. The Clash of the Counter-bureaucracy and Development.<br />

Centre for Global Development. July 2010. (www.cgdev.org/content/<br />

publications/detail/1424271)<br />

Serrat, O. The Most Significant Change Technique. Knowledge<br />

Solutions. Asian Development Bank. January 2009.<br />

http://epress.anu.edu/au/dialogue_methods/mobile_devices/ch)3s06.<br />

html<br />

…those development programs that<br />

are most precisely and easily measured<br />

are the least transformational, and those<br />

programs that are most transformational “are<br />

”<br />

the least measurable.<br />

18<br />

page<br />

Enabling change for development

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!