EVALUATION

Recommendations

Info

AN INDEPENDENT <strong>EVALUATION</strong> OF THE LCNF 9. demonstrates clear project methodology and shows effectiveness of implementation It is with these criteria in mind that we have developed our evaluation methodology. 2.2 Evaluation process Figure 1 presents the high-level process adopted for this evaluation. The process follows three core workstreams, these are as follows: • defining what is meant by innovation; • stakeholder methodology; and • evaluation framework. Initially we defined ‘innovation’ in the context of the GB DNOs – and this was subsequently used as part of the assessment process. This definition is a key input into the remaining two workstreams (more details on the definition of innovation are set out in 2.3). The second workstream concentrates on the development of the ‘stakeholder engagement methodology’. The focus of this workstream has been to develop detailed questionnaires which were sent to a list of key stakeholders (including the DNOs, project partners, other industry and academics). The list has been developed in conjunction with Ofgem. More detail on the stakeholder engagement methodology is set out in Section 2.4. The third workstream is concerned with the development of the ‘evaluation framework’. This has involved the development of a methodology for both the qualitative and quantitative analysis and the subsequent assessment. More detail on the evaluation framework is provided in Section 2.5. Figure 1 – Approach to the evaluation Develop stakeholder engagement methodology Develop three different questionnaire types Review questionnaire responses Follow-up with respondents Define innovation Engagement with academics Conduct telephone interviews Qualitative and quantitative assessment Develop evaluation framework Establish qualitative & quantitative approach Finalise methodology Apply methodology to responses PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING October 2016 713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx 12
AN INDEPENDENT <strong>EVALUATION</strong> OF THE LCNF 2.3 Defining innovation This evaluation includes an assessment of innovation. So while the term innovation is broadly understood, (i.e. to make changes in something established, especially by introducing new methods, ideas, or products), the process of identifying whether a method, idea, or product is innovative is likely to be interpreted differently by different people. As part of this project, therefore, it has been necessary to both define what is mean by innovation in the context of the GB DNOs, and also to ensure that this definition is understandable and acceptable within the industry, and to key industry stakeholders. An important part of this process has been the development of a definition for ‘innovation’ in the context of the GB DNOs; this was subsequently used as part of the assessment process. There are several definitions for innovation; however the following definition was agreed during discussions with the academics: Innovation: changes in both technology and administrative/management practices that leads to an improved performance of the company. The improved performance can be demonstrated by a wide variety of financial and non-financial indicators. Building on this definition we developed and defined three different levels of innovation – ‘low’, ‘medium’ and ‘high’. A set of words was agreed with the academics and used to describe each of these different levels of innovation for discussions with the DNO businesses. The definitions are summarised in Table 1 and a full description is presented in Annex F. By defining the level of innovation in this way, we have been able to estimate any change in the level of innovation in the DNOs over the period of the LCNF. This includes how ‘embedded’ innovation is in the business and culture of the DNOs, and therefore enables a view to be developed on the extent to which the current level of innovation – as observed in the DNOs – would continue if the innovation regulatory incentive was to be removed. This is expected to inform the future regulatory funding incentive programme for innovation in the GB electricity distribution sector. PÖYRY MANAGEMENT CONSULTING October 2016 713_Poyry_Report_Evaluation_of_the_LCNF_FINAL_Oct_2016_v700.docx 13
Page 1 and 2: AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 15: AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 67 and 68:
AN INDEPENDENT EVALUATION OF THE LC
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
Page 341 and 342:
Page 343 and 344:
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
show all

EVALUATION

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?