CCCRTE

The "process" group

by Michael Randle, CCCRTE

This group discussed the cluster of issues related to the tension between pre-set objectives, on the one hand, and the need to respond to the dynamics of the group and newly emerging questions, on the other. How does this tension impact on the process of evaluation?

The group favoured an "action research" approach to conflict resolution work itself, which implies a constant process of review and evaluation, and adjustment of both objectives and methods. Evaluation is therefore formative, that is aimed at clarifying goals and improving performance.

Evaluation needs to operate at two main levels. It has to be related to (a) the broad strategic objectives of the wider project or programme and (b) the stated aims of single events. The group -- with thanks to Diana -- produced a diagram to indicate the overlapping aims and/or objectives that one needs to revisit in the process of evaluation.

the aims during the course of the event itself -- to create, in effect, a new contract. But one should be cautious about doing this, and where it is done, make sure that there is an explicit and clearly democratic process. We were conscious of how an event can be hijacked by one or tow determined people with their own agenda.

In evaluating an event in which the original aims and objectives have been radically altered, it was necessary to beware of self-deception. There is an understandable inclination to cast about for other positive outcomes and spin-offs. Sometimes, however, it is crucial to recognise an event has failed and make that the starting point for an evaluation of one's methods and/or the broader goals of the overall project.

The group felt that outsiders could play a useful role in evaluation, mainly in relation to the broader programme. We were more sceptical about the value of outsiders being brought in to evaluate a single event. There is a danger that they are wholly removed from the ethos of the work that they will miss, or misunderstand, the point of it. In any case, their evaluation work needs to be carried out in close co-operation with participants.

However, well-informed individuals, such as academics or political commentators with specialists knowledge of an area and its problems, can make an invaluable contribution to the task of assessing the broader impact of a programme, even if their comments sometimes raise hackles!

Finally, the group made two caveats:

a) beware of "over-evaluation." Evaluation has its place but can begin to overshadow the substantive work;

b) there is a limit to the control organisers of an event can exercise. Thus the concerns and priorities of participants, particularly is they are coming from a conflict situation, can cut across the carefully prepared agenda of the organisers. This is less likely to occur, however, where there has been an adequate preliminary assessment of a situation and advance consultation.

newsletter | ccts