An organisation wishes to evaluate one of its programs. It can ask a staff member or hire someone outside the organisation. Which should it choose?
Surprisingly little guidance is available for this common scenario. A review of 30 texts dealing with organisational performance and evaluation shows that too often the issue is assumed one way or the other.
Management texts aimed at business and organisational audiences tend to presume that evaluation is conducted by internal evaluators, usually managers. By contrast the specialist evaluation literature almost always proceeds from the opposite assumption: that evaluation is undertaken by external evaluators.
This paper proposes a series of measures for comparing the strengths and weaknesses of internal and external evaluators. These include cost, knowledge, flexibility, objectivity, accountability, willingness to criticise, ethics and utilisation of results.
A set of guidelines is offered to assist organisations in choosing between internal and external evaluation in each particular case.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BraskampL.A., BrandenburgD.C., & OryJ.C.1987, ‘Lessons about clients’ expectations, in NowakowskiJ (ed.), The client perspective on evaluation: New directions for program evaluation, no. 36, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
2.
CronbachL.J., AmbronS.R., DornbuschS.M., HessR.D., HornikR.C., PhillipsD.C., WalkerD.F., & WeinerS.S.1981, Towards reform of program evaluation: aims, methods, and institutional arrangements, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
3.
CummingsO.W., NowakowskiJ.R., SchwandtT.A., EichelbergerR.T., KleistK.C., LarsonC.L., & KnottT.G.1988, ‘Business perspectives on internal/external evaluation’, in JA McLaughlin, LJ Weber, RW Covert & RB Ingle (eds), Evaluation Utilization, vol. 39, pp. 59–74.
4.
CzarneckiM.T.1999, Managing by measuring: how to improve your organization's performance through effective benchmarking, AMACOM, New York.
5.
FaaseT.P., & PujdakS.1987, Shared understanding of organizational culture', in NowakowskiJ (ed.), The client perspective on evaluation: New directions for program evaluation, no. 36, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
6.
GlobersonA., GlobersonS., & FramptonJ.1991, You can't manage what you don't measure: control and evaluation in organizations.Gower Publications, Aldershot.
7.
GoldbergB., & SifonisJ.G.1994, Dynamic planning: the art of managing beyond tomorrow, Oxford University Press, New York.
8.
GubaE.G., & LincolnY.S.1987, ‘The countenances of fourth-generation evaluation’, in PalumboD.J. (ed.), The politics of program evaluation, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.
9.
GunnW.J.1987, ‘Client concerns and strategies in evaluation studies’, in NowakowskiJ (ed.), The client perspective on evaluation: New directions for program evaluation, no. 36, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
10.
HogbenD.1977, ‘Curriculum evaluation: by whom, for whom?’, paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association.
11.
HouseE.R.1980, Evaluating with validity, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, California.
12.
HouseE.R.1993, Professional evaluation: social impact and political consequences, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.
LoveA.J.1991, Internal evaluation: building organizations from within, Sage Publications, Newbury Park, California.
15.
MathisonS.1994, ‘Rethinking the evaluator role: partnerships between organizations and evaluators’, Evaluation and Program Planning, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 299–304.
16.
MeyersW.R.1981, The evaluation enterprise: a realistic appraisal of evaluation careers, methods, and applications, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
17.
NewmanD.L., & BrownR.D.1996, Applied ethics for program evaluation, Sage Publications, San Francisco.
18.
NowakowskiJ.1987, ‘Editor's notes’, in NowakowskiJ (ed.), The client perspective on evaluation: New directions for program evaluation, no. 36, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
19.
OwenJ.M. with RogersP.J.1999, Program evaluation: forms and approaches, 2nd edn, Allen & Unwin, St Leonards, NSW.
20.
PattonM.Q.1997, Utilization-focused evaluation: the new century text, 3rd edn, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
21.
PerloffR.1979, ‘Evaluator intervention: the case for and against’, in PerloffR (ed.), Evaluator interventions: pros and cons, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, California.
22.
PosavacE.J., & CareyR.G.1997, Program evaluation: methods and case studies, 5th edn, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
RothwellW.J., & CooksonP.S.1997, Beyond instruction: comprehensive program planning for business and education, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
26.
ScrivenM.1997, Truth and objectivity in evaluation', in ChelimskyE, & ShadishW.R. (eds), Evaluation for the 21st century: a handbook, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
27.
ShapiroJ.Z., & BlackwellD.L.1987, ‘Large-scale evaluation on a limited budget: the partnership experience’, in NowakowskiJ (ed.), The client perspective on evaluation: New directions for program evaluation, no. 36, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
28.
SluyterG.V.1998, Improving organizational performance: a practical guidebook for the human services field, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, California.
29.
WeissC.H.1972, Evaluation research: methods for assessing program effectiveness, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
30.
WeissC.H.1998, Evaluation: methods for studying programs and policies, 2nd edn, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
