Compare methods

	Results-Based Management	Theory-Based Impact Evaluation
Field	Development Studies	Development Studies
Family	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Year of origin	2002	2009
Originator	OECD-DAC; United Nations Development Group; aid-effectiveness agenda (Paris Declaration / Accra)	Carol Weiss; Howard White (3ie)
Type	Management and evaluation strategy for development results	Evaluation approach / framework
Seminal source	OECD-DAC (2002). Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management. OECD Development Assistance Committee, Paris.	White, H. (2009). Theory-Based Impact Evaluation: Principles and Practice. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 1(3), 271–284.
Aliases	RBM, Managing for Development Results, Managing for Results, Results Framework Approach	Theory of Change Evaluation, Contribution Analysis, Theory-Driven Evaluation, Causal-Chain Impact Evaluation
Related	4	4
Summary	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.	Theory-based impact evaluation evaluates a programme by first making explicit the theory of change — the causal chain of assumptions and mechanisms through which inputs are expected to produce outcomes and impacts — and then gathering evidence to test whether each link in that chain holds. Rather than treating the programme as a black box and estimating only the net effect, it asks not just whether a programme worked but why, for whom, and under what conditions. Articulated by Carol Weiss and brought into development practice by Howard White and 3ie, it complements, rather than competes with, counterfactual designs.