Results Based Management in Practice – Experiences and learning By Kai Matturi Knowledge & Learning Adviser Mary Banda, 37, in her field in May Mary has received training and a goat from Concern's RAIN project in Zambia. Photo by Gareth Bentley 2015 DSAI Annual Conference The photo shows vocational skill trainees Tsegaye and Mubarke with project coordinator Mulugeta Engeda, basic metal work training centre, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Photo by Cheney, 2014.

Presentation Overview  Results Based Management  Results Based Management and Concern  Country case Study – Ethiopia  Discussion  Emerging issues

What is the results agenda? “The search for ‘what works’ – for the causal underpinning of interventions – is the basis for the Evidence Based Policy (EBP) movement.Related ideas have inspired other rationalist governance ‘reforms’ of the late 20th century, including ‘new public management’, results based management, and of course evaluation more generally” (Stern et al 2012: 9). Stern, E., Stame, N., Mayne, J., Forss, K., Davies, R., Befani, B., (2012) ‘Broadening The Range of Designs and Methods for Impact Evaluations’, DFID Working Paper 38 available at

The truth about results..!

Defining RBM for Concern  A broad management strategy by which all actors, contributing directly or indirectly, achieve defined results and make any necessary changes in the way they operate to improve performance.  RBM should make us use information and evidence on actual results to inform decision making on the design, resourcing and delivery of programmes and activities as well as for accountability and reporting.  Programme  Project  Country  Organisation

Concern and the results agenda Concern has committed to adopting a Results Based Management (RBM) approach in delivering on its strategic objective to improve programme quality and organisational learning.  Key activities include, but not limited to:  Setting up Programme Approaches & Learning HQ  Design and roll out of the 2009 Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Guide  Drive to design programme results frameworks which focus on longer- term changes  Digital Data Gathering  Annual review process at different levels

Case Study – Concern Ethiopia Creation of the Programme Quality Unit – drive country level Key change - more focused programme quarterly monitoring visits:  Verify that activities described by the partners were being carried out, and framing discussions around the achievement of outputs/outcomes  Pin-point activities that were not working or inappropriate and adjust projects accordingly  Check the quality of partners’ work, including looking at targeting, monitoring and evaluation systems and verifying data collection  Find out about any new techniques or processes that would be useful to share within Concern and with other partners  Promote collective learning and reflection within the team and amongst partners

Continued…  Senior managers present  The process refined as they go along  The logical framework a key reference point – but for the initial setting of targets which could be amended  Budget figures inserted against outputs  Process takes three days, with programme participant visits and discussions  Action plan agreed and followed up on at each subsequent visit

Emerging practice  Help to improve performance, as partners know what is expected of them and where there are problems in implementation, a clear action plan to address these is developed  The process has the unintended benefit of building team spirit and empowering programme and partner staff due to the inclusion of senior management in what were initially viewed as more routine programme processes  The biggest benefit to the team in Ethiopia is that results based management helps them to make quick decisions on resource management, and identify problems that may exist early on

Key issues  The experience from Ethiopia seems to indicate that partners and Concern staff embrace the idea of quantified reporting since it provides them with a clear picture on the performance of a particular project  The process allows for critical reflection and learning  Concern Ethiopia grapples with assessing wider performance and contribution  Different levels of results  Contribution to Woreda and federal results  Results of more complex issues (not just economic assets) more difficult to measure and document  Development of results frameworks and annual review HQ & CO levels

Key challenges  Assumption of knowledge related to RBM  Many projects and programmes are 2-5 years in duration – what can be achieved vs what is expected?  Separate systems for financial and programme reporting  Knowledge Management  Culture and norms in relation to critical appraisal  Quantification of results in RFs over rich qualitative evidence  Guidance documents can often be inaccessible  Changing demands/mixed organisational messages results in capacity gaps to deliver on results  Contribution vs attribution – IE Study  Building a culture of reflection and continuous learning

Thanks for listening  Contact details:    Skype: cw_kai.matturi