ºÝºÝߣ

ºÝºÝߣShare a Scribd company logo

Developmental Leadership and Evaluation

•Download as PPTX, PDF•
•
Susanne Newton
Susanne Newton

The document discusses developmental leadership and evaluation approaches. It provides examples of the Warlpiri Education and Training Trust's (WETT) monitoring and evaluation methods from 2008-2018, which included both quantitative and qualitative data collection. It notes that mixed methods are needed for evaluation but that the right approach depends on politics, interests, and worldviews. Developmental leadership and appropriate governance may help manage different stakeholder interests and perspectives in evaluation.

1 of 15
Download to read offline
Developmental Leadership and Evaluation Danielle Campbell, Chris Roche and Linda Kelly, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University
The Warlpiri Education and Training Trust (WETT) WETT wins national Indigenous Governance Award, 2018
Cynefin Framework Snowden and Boone (2007) ‘A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making’
Key Messages - Mixed methods (Mertens and Hesse-Biber 2013; Cowen and Cartwright 2019; Ang 2019) - Feedback loops (Guijt and Roche, 2014; Ramalingam, Wild and Buffardi 2019)
Generalisable knowledge more valuable & usually created through formal Research or M&E Local, contextual knowledge more valuable & often created through informal exchange of local knowledge Key Messages - Power and politics matter
M&E Staff Front-line staff, local people Senior Staff Generalised, aggregated succinct knowledge more valued Local, contextual, rich knowledge & feedback more valued And who is caught in the middle?
Key Messages - Developmental leadership (Hudson, McLoughlin, Roche and Marquette, 2018) - Appropriate governance arrangements (Roche and Denney 2019)
WETT set-up: 2001-07 WETT Painting by Advisory Committee members: Barbara Napanangka Martin, Nancy Napurrurla Oldfield and Maisie Napaljarri Kitson.
Context
WETT M&E 2008-18 - Quantitative data collection - Financial reporting - Capacity measurement - Social return on investment
2008-18 M&E - Interviewing - Case studies - Staff reflections - Social network analysis
2019 - Developing a WETT M&E Framework Co-facilitators - Marlkirdi Rose and Chris Roche WETT Landowner and Advisory Committee members – Oct 2019
PLUS • Strong language and culture • Strong young people, families, leaders and communities • Respectful relationships with outsiders • Self-determination What do WETT committee members want WETT to support?
Implications - Mixed methods approaches needed but the 'right' data/ methods mix influenced by politics, interests and world- views. - M&E practitioners must manage these different interests. - Developmental leadership may be helpful. - Appropriate M&E governance arrangements needed.
Developmental Leadership and Evaluation

More Related Content

Developmental Leadership and Evaluation

  • 1. Developmental Leadership and Evaluation Danielle Campbell, Chris Roche and Linda Kelly, Institute for Human Security and Social Change, La Trobe University
  • 2. The Warlpiri Education and Training Trust (WETT) WETT wins national Indigenous Governance Award, 2018
  • 3. Cynefin Framework Snowden and Boone (2007) ‘A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making’
  • 4. Key Messages - Mixed methods (Mertens and Hesse-Biber 2013; Cowen and Cartwright 2019; Ang 2019) - Feedback loops (Guijt and Roche, 2014; Ramalingam, Wild and Buffardi 2019)
  • 5. Generalisable knowledge more valuable & usually created through formal Research or M&E Local, contextual knowledge more valuable & often created through informal exchange of local knowledge Key Messages - Power and politics matter
  • 6. M&E Staff Front-line staff, local people Senior Staff Generalised, aggregated succinct knowledge more valued Local, contextual, rich knowledge & feedback more valued And who is caught in the middle?
  • 7. Key Messages - Developmental leadership (Hudson, McLoughlin, Roche and Marquette, 2018) - Appropriate governance arrangements (Roche and Denney 2019)
  • 8. WETT set-up: 2001-07 WETT Painting by Advisory Committee members: Barbara Napanangka Martin, Nancy Napurrurla Oldfield and Maisie Napaljarri Kitson.
  • 10. WETT M&E 2008-18 - Quantitative data collection - Financial reporting - Capacity measurement - Social return on investment
  • 11. 2008-18 M&E - Interviewing - Case studies - Staff reflections - Social network analysis
  • 12. 2019 - Developing a WETT M&E Framework Co-facilitators - Marlkirdi Rose and Chris Roche WETT Landowner and Advisory Committee members – Oct 2019
  • 13. PLUS • Strong language and culture • Strong young people, families, leaders and communities • Respectful relationships with outsiders • Self-determination What do WETT committee members want WETT to support?
  • 14. Implications - Mixed methods approaches needed but the 'right' data/ methods mix influenced by politics, interests and world- views. - M&E practitioners must manage these different interests. - Developmental leadership may be helpful. - Appropriate M&E governance arrangements needed.