Sharing findings along the way is a good way to foster the inclusive involvement of as wide a range of stakeholders as possible in project planning and
implementation. Encouraging researchers to get early drafts of findings out to
potential users for feedback from early on is one way to build a learning culture
and to encourage open-mindedness.
Rigid application of just one specific approach most likely will not work.
Whether it is the adoption of a technology, an M&E methodology, a learning
approach or a scientific result, it is often not the whole package that is attractive
to users but specific pieces. We need to allow users to cherry pick while ensuring
that the relevant linkages remain intact so that the context is not lost for others who
may want other cherries.
Solutions that are good enough rather than optimal. In many domains of
knowledge and practice there is no best practice or option, particularly when the
problem is complex and resources are constrained. CCAFS made considerable
changes once it had started to implement an approach based on TOC and impact
pathways, and in time moved towards a leaner and simpler model. Time will tell if
some of the details inevitably lost in this process will need to be added back in, but
the notion of “good enough” systems needs to be a key guiding principle.
Addressing tensions across scale. CCAFS is still in the process of embedding
TOCs for the different organizational units of the program, in order to provide a
flexible framework that allows for aggregation of output, outcomes and targets
across the different units. For example, targets need to be framed locally with users
and beneficiaries, and voiced in such a way as to allow the flexibility to deal with
uncertainty and emerging priorities and opportunities. New investments of time and
effort may be needed to identify and work with non-traditional partners to promote
behavioral change in shared IPs.
Providing value for money. Many funding agencies now require that grantees
demonstrate value for money. The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Zusammenarbeit
states that its ‘work is systematically geared towards results, the yardstick by
which we measure the success of our work. We want to help achieve tangible
positive changes on the ground’ (GIZ 2015). Some have critiqued the whole notion
of payment by results as applied to development and research-for-development on
the basis that it provides perverse incentives that actually diminishes costeffectiveness (see Chambers 2014). As noted above, there is much work still to
do on appropriate measurement mechanisms, but this does not diminish the need to
demonstrate accountability.
Balancing science and outcomes. Research is often curiosity-driven, and traditional indicators of success center on peer-reviewed publications in high-profile
academic journals. In today’s highly competitive research environment another
crucial success factor relates to fundraising: the ability to write and win competitive
research proposals. Neither of these motivations for research is guaranteed to
deliver development outcomes. For CGIAR and its research programs, it is still
early days, but preliminary results suggest that “successful RBM” relates to effective and efficient research leading to outcomes, with a minimum of perverse
incentives. The building of an IP with a narrative TOC forces researchers to give
74
T. Schuetz et al.
implementation. Encouraging researchers to get early drafts of findings out to
potential users for feedback from early on is one way to build a learning culture
and to encourage open-mindedness.
Rigid application of just one specific approach most likely will not work.
Whether it is the adoption of a technology, an M&E methodology, a learning
approach or a scientific result, it is often not the whole package that is attractive
to users but specific pieces. We need to allow users to cherry pick while ensuring
that the relevant linkages remain intact so that the context is not lost for others who
may want other cherries.
Solutions that are good enough rather than optimal. In many domains of
knowledge and practice there is no best practice or option, particularly when the
problem is complex and resources are constrained. CCAFS made considerable
changes once it had started to implement an approach based on TOC and impact
pathways, and in time moved towards a leaner and simpler model. Time will tell if
some of the details inevitably lost in this process will need to be added back in, but
the notion of “good enough” systems needs to be a key guiding principle.
Addressing tensions across scale. CCAFS is still in the process of embedding
TOCs for the different organizational units of the program, in order to provide a
flexible framework that allows for aggregation of output, outcomes and targets
across the different units. For example, targets need to be framed locally with users
and beneficiaries, and voiced in such a way as to allow the flexibility to deal with
uncertainty and emerging priorities and opportunities. New investments of time and
effort may be needed to identify and work with non-traditional partners to promote
behavioral change in shared IPs.
Providing value for money. Many funding agencies now require that grantees
demonstrate value for money. The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Zusammenarbeit
states that its ‘work is systematically geared towards results, the yardstick by
which we measure the success of our work. We want to help achieve tangible
positive changes on the ground’ (GIZ 2015). Some have critiqued the whole notion
of payment by results as applied to development and research-for-development on
the basis that it provides perverse incentives that actually diminishes costeffectiveness (see Chambers 2014). As noted above, there is much work still to
do on appropriate measurement mechanisms, but this does not diminish the need to
demonstrate accountability.
Balancing science and outcomes. Research is often curiosity-driven, and traditional indicators of success center on peer-reviewed publications in high-profile
academic journals. In today’s highly competitive research environment another
crucial success factor relates to fundraising: the ability to write and win competitive
research proposals. Neither of these motivations for research is guaranteed to
deliver development outcomes. For CGIAR and its research programs, it is still
early days, but preliminary results suggest that “successful RBM” relates to effective and efficient research leading to outcomes, with a minimum of perverse
incentives. The building of an IP with a narrative TOC forces researchers to give
74
T. Schuetz et al.