Porovnat metody
Prohlédněte si vybrané metody vedle sebe; řádky, které se liší, jsou zvýrazněny.
| Results-Based Management× | Most Significant Change for Development× | |
|---|---|---|
| Obor | Development Studies | Development Studies |
| Rodina | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Rok vzniku≠ | 2002 | 2005 |
| Tvůrce≠ | OECD-DAC; United Nations Development Group; aid-effectiveness agenda (Paris Declaration / Accra) | Rick Davies & Jess Dart |
| Typ≠ | Management and evaluation strategy for development results | Participatory, story-based monitoring and evaluation technique |
| Původní zdroj≠ | OECD-DAC (2002). Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management. OECD Development Assistance Committee, Paris. link ↗ | Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). The 'Most Significant Change' (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use. CARE International, Oxfam, et al. link ↗ |
| Další názvy≠ | RBM, Managing for Development Results, Managing for Results, Results Framework Approach | MSC technique, Story-based monitoring, Most significant change stories, Monitoring without indicators |
| Příbuzné | 4 | 4 |
| Shrnutí≠ | Results-Based Management (RBM) is a management strategy that orients all the activities, resources, and processes of an organisation or programme toward achieving and demonstrating clearly defined results, rather than merely tracking inputs delivered and activities completed. Codified in the OECD-DAC's 2002 evaluation glossary and adopted across the United Nations, the World Bank, and bilateral agencies, it embeds a results chain, performance indicators, and continuous monitoring into the full project cycle so that evidence on outcomes feeds back into decisions. | The Most Significant Change (MSC) technique is a participatory, story-based approach to monitoring and evaluating development programmes that dispenses with predefined indicators. Developed by Rick Davies and elaborated with Jess Dart in their widely used 2005 guide, it works by systematically collecting stories of significant change from those closest to a programme and then filtering and selecting the most significant of them through deliberative panels at successive levels of the organisational hierarchy. The result is a structured, dialogical account of what stakeholders themselves judge to be the most important outcomes of an intervention. |
| ScholarGateDatová sada ↗ |
|
|