Students of evaluation have found many examples of reports gathering dust on the shelf, as well as politically hired outsiders with an ax who relentlessly cut public programs. These images indicate that evaluation often does not fulfill its genuine democratic potential. A study of the Danish municipal sector shows that out of 600 evaluations, less than 1% led to termination of the evaluated activities, whereas 78% of the evaluations led to adjustments of program activities. On this basis, an alternative view of evaluation is proposed: a managerial support system. This requires a new understanding of the utilization problem in evaluation and its democratic ramifications.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adamsen, L. , Fisker, J., & Jørgensen, K. (1991). Forsøgsstrategi—samfundsmæssige konsekvenser og fremtidsperspektiver. Bd. 1 [The experimental strategy—societal consequences and perspectives for the future]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Amternes og Kommunernes Forskningsinstitut.
2.
Albæk, E. (1988). Fra sandhed til information [From truth to information]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Akademisk Forlag.
3.
Albæk, E. (1996). Why all this evaluation? Theoretical notes and empirical observations on the functions and growth of evaluation, with Denmark as an illustrative case. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 11(2), 1-34.
4.
Albæk, E. (1998). Knowledge, interests and the many meanings of evaluation: A developmental perspective. Scandinavian Journal of Social Welfare, 7, 94-98.
5.
Albæk, E. , & Winter, S. (1993). Evaluering i Danmark: Rationalitet eller politisk våben? [Evaluation in Denmark: Rationality or political weapon?]Politica, 25(1), 27-46.
6.
Alkin, M. C. (1990). Debates on evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
7.
Beck, U. , Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1994). Reflexive modernization. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
8.
Dahler-Larsen, P. (1998a). Den rituelle reflektion—om evaluering i organisationer [The ritualized reflection—on evaluations in organizations]. Odense, Denmark: Odense Universitetsforlag.
9.
Dahler-Larsen, P. (1998b). Kommentar til Bjørn Lomborgs evaluering af evaluering [Comment to Bjørn Lomborgs evaluation of evaluation]. Nordisk Administrativt Tidsskrift, 79(2), 233-237.
10.
Dahler-Larsen, P. (1998a). Beyond non-utilization of evaluations: An institutional perspective. Knowledge and Policy.
11.
Dalsgaard, L. , & Lassen, M. (1996, August 15-17). Policydannelse og præstationsmålinger [Policy-making and performance indicators]. Paper presented at the Nordic Conference of Political Scientists, Helsinki, Finland.
12.
deLeon, P. (1978). A theory of policy termination. In J. May & A. Wildawsky (Eds.), The policy cycle (pp. 279-300). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
13.
deLeon, P. (1987). Policy termination as a political phenomenon. In D. J. Palumbo (Ed.), The politics of program evaluation (pp. 173-202). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
14.
deLeon, P. (1988). Advice and consent: The development of the policy sciences. New York: Russell Sage.
15.
Feldman, M. , & March, J. (1981). Information in organizations as signal and symbol. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 171-184.
16.
Goldenberg, E. N. (1983). The three faces of evaluation. Journal of Policy and Management, 2, 515-525.
17.
Greene, J. (1994). Qualitative program evaluation. In Y. Lincoln & N. Denzin (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 530-544). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
Guba, E. G. , & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
Hellstern, G. M. (1986). Assessing evaluation research. In F. X. Kaufmann, G. Majone, & V. Ostrom (Eds.), Guidance, control and evaluation in the public sector (pp. 279-313). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.
20.
Levitt, B. M. , & March, J. (1988). Organizational learning. Annual Review of Sociology, 14, 319-336.
21.
Lomborg, B. (1998). Metodologisk vurdering af borger/bruger-undersøgelser i Århus Amts kommuner 1995-96 [A methodological evaluation of citizen/user-surveys in the municipalities of Århus county 1995-96]. Nordisk Administrativt Tidsskrift, 79(1), 93-120.
22.
March, J. G. , & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American Political Science Review, 78, 734-749.
23.
Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24.
Palumbo, D. J. (1987). Politics and evaluation. In D. J. Palumbo (Ed.), The politics of program evaluation (pp. 12-46). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25.
Patton, M. Q. (1986). Utilization-focused evaluation. London: Sage.
26.
Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
Premfors, R. (1989). Policyanalys. Kunskap, praktik och etik i offentlig verksamhet [Policy-analysis. Knowledge, practice and ethics in the public sector]. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
28.
Rist, R. C. (1994). Influencing the policy process with qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 545-558). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
Sabatier, P. A. (1985). What can we learn from implementation research? In F. X. Kaufmann, G. Majone, & V. Ostrom (Eds.), Guidance, control and evaluation in the public sector (pp. 313-326). Berlin, Germany: de Gruyter.
30.
Sabatier, P. A. (1986). Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation. Research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy, 6(1), 21-48.
31.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32.
Scriven, M. (1991). Beyond formative and summative evaluation. In M. McLaughlin & D. C. Phillips (Eds.), Evaluation and education: At quarter century (pp. 19-64). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
33.
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration: A sociological perspective. New York: Harper and Row.
34.
Shadish, W. R. , Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. (1991). Good theory for social program evaluation. In W. Shadish, T. Cook, & L. Leviton (Eds.), Foundations of program evaluations (pp. 36-67). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
35.
van der Knaap, P. (1995). Policy evaluation and learning. Feedback, enlightenment or argumentation?Evaluation, 1, 189-216.
36.
Vedung, E. (1991). Utvärdering i politik och förvaltning [Evaluation in public policy and administration]. Lund, Sweden: Studentlitteratur.
37.
Vedung, E. (1997). Public policy and program evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
38.
Weiss, C. , & Bucuvalas, M. J. (1980). Social science research and decision making. New York: Columbia University Press.
39.
Weiss, C. H. (1984). Increasing the likelihood of influencing decisions. In L. Rutman (Ed.), Evaluation research methods: A basic guide (pp. 159-190). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
40.
Weiss, C. H. (1997). Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future. New Directions for Evaluation, 76, 41-55.
