I have been working on research and development projects for about 10 years. One of the few constants in the proposal calls is the persistence of donors in having a theory of change from the applicants. However, I do not think the theory of change is a good value for the time of the designers. I wonder how a proposal team can develop a theory that would be valid for 3 years considering climate change and transition in the international power system. Also, I have seen that more than half of the theory of changes I evaluated do not articulate assumptions, more than 90% do not use any risk association.
What do you think?
'Social Impact' is an excellent assessment based on not only primary but even comparing with secondary data. However, the assessor needs to evaluate relevant parameters with seriousness and apply his own understanding through interaction during primary survey. Being a dynamic system, the theory of change is certainly a factor that plays a major role in the evaluation. Amateurs may not be successful right away as this would call for some experience to evaluate parameter in their merit.
Hello Prof. Murat,
Theory of Change works for all fields as each research has a goal that has certain objectives with tasks that can achieved at different times to achieve the intended purpose in the society.
A good theory of change can help to: develop better Key Evaluation Questions, identify key indicators for monitoring, identify gaps in available data, prioritize additional data collection, and provide a structure for data analysis and reporting. https://www.betterevaluation.org/en/node/5280
Theory of Change (ToC) is a methodology for planning, participation, and evaluation that is used in companies, philanthropy, not-for-profit and government sectors to promote social change. Theory of Change defines long-term goals and then maps backward to identify necessary preconditions. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_change
incorporating a theory or a model related to change when implementing practice changes helps in understanding how implementation will take place, what influences or affects the outcomes leading to either success or failure. the theory or the model serves as a guideline making it easier for implementation to take place. https://www.coursehero.com/tutors-problems/Nursing/10627774-Why-is-it-important-to-incorporate-a-theory-or-model-related-to-change/
Dear Simon, Mariola, Shyam, Kiprotich and Chinaza,
Thank you very much for the answers. It appears that in theory, theory of changes can be used as a silver bullet of project management. However, real-life hardly follows theories. Especially in the context of unpredictability due to climate change and pandemic, it is very difficult to come up with a simplistic approach that can capture a big part of reality. In addition, theorizing requires deep understanding about subject matter and high abstraction capabilities. I am involved in making theory of changes in more than 10 years and I am not sure if I got it right. Do you think theories can be done in the unpredictable times we experience in a simple way that can be understood easier?
Thanks for kicking off this great discussion. I think theories of change are helpful to give direction, the North star, in interventions. But they should not be confused with impact Pathways or action plans, it is theory, we can only understand fractions and compnents of the system, let alone influence them, so let's be humble and collaborate with those who believe in the same theory and are willing to do their part. Together we can do it
I love the challenge that you have given us. I am not particularly fan of complex theories of change. I understand and see the use of the tool, I would like to see more of the making it, for example how did you do it? with who did you do it- who was included? and how often did you go back to your theory of change?
For mechanistic thinkers, the theory of change is a must, both for guiding the process and measuring the impact. For constructivists, who are building a future without knowing what it exactly looks like, the theory of change is not a must for either guiding the process or measuring the impact. For them, collective learning is a must. However, if there can be an amalgam of concepts, where a theory of change drives the collective learning process, then both the schools can be brought together, the process can be fine-tuned and the knowledge about how to usher desirable changes amidst uncertainties can be harvested and scaled.
Murat, thanks for the challenge. I would also answer in the line of Falguni Guharay reply above. I think the problem is often on the mechanistic use of the concept. I would see Logical Framework the same way. When they are done to simply comply with donor requirements or set M and E indicators, they seem to lose their value, at least for the purpose we think they are meant for. If theory of change is used as a tool for reflection, learning and collective action, it becomes extremely useful. The idea should not be to capture all the possible continuities and disruptions. Rather it should be seen as a risk management strategy, where we get the chance to reflect possible scenarios and develop mitigation actions. If well done, it could also help us to set mutually agreed goals, set reasonable assumptions and clarity actors’ roles and responsibilities. For it to be useful and meaningful, I think, it would also require frequent revision and reflection to validate the assumptions made. In the end, however, we need to remember that the theory of change may deviate from the practice of change because of the dynamics in the world.
Totally agree with points made on the issue of quality and consistency in theories of change. My first task as an evaluator is often to reconstruct a low quality TOC, and so often you can see enormous logical inconsistencies that then explains minimal impact. I agree that poor quality TOCs are a waste of time, but this should not prevent us from trying to do better. It is fundamental to be able to set out clearly how you think your intervention is going to work. I made this tool to help embed assumptions and better, mechanism-based theory into TOCs: Technical Report The Building Blocks of programme theory: how to get better a...
Donors guide research and development agendas using simplistic tools like LGA, SWOT analysis, theory of change. Researchers must believe in scientifically guided concepts and theories grounded in epistemology or ontology, the form of questioning entails first or second-order observations.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Cognitive Science
- Thinking