Abstract
In this paper I discuss the characteristics of an expert evaluator. My thesis is that the expert evaluator—the ‘black belt’ in the field—is characterised by taking a broad view that sees patterns where others see points; by delving deep for root causes where others see surface explanations; and by emphasising worth and value. This paper is a thought piece and a reflection—its aim is to stimulate debate and discussion rather than to offer definitive conclusions.
The intent of this paper is to explore what it is that makes a ‘black belt’ evaluator; that is, someone who is a recognised expert in the area with demonstrated mastery. The thesis of the paper is that expertise/mastery in evaluation involves more that just the superior acquisition of the same set of skills, attributes or competencies that define ‘an evaluator’; rather expertise/mastery involves an additional set of qualities. These additional qualities are taking the macro perspective and a focus on value for the client.
The structure of this paper is as follows. After discussing why I think it matters to consider ‘black belt’ evaluators, and what ‘black belt’ means, I describe the work in Australia and New Zealand on evaluator competencies, Next, I consider from a theoretical perspective the nature of competence and expertise before considering how competence models fit within an expert–novice framework. I then draw on the literature on expert–novice differences to hypothesise areas in which expert and novice evaluators might differ.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.