Case study of an evaluation coaching model: Exploring the role of the evaluator

Ensminger, David C.; Kallemeyn, Leanne; Rempert, Tania; Wade, James; Polanin, Megan

doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2015.01.002

Cited by 13 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…as standing in judgment over the board. Writing in the context of general, rather than board-specific evaluation,Ensminger, Kallemeyn, Rempert, Wade, and Polanin (2015) suggest evaluators resemble coaches, guiding toward optimum performance (a view endorsed for boards byIndependent Audit, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The framework developed in this paper points to a need to detect and interpret deficits in cultural and emotional intelligence, social capital, and persuasiveness that the literature associates with board effectiveness. Research could also help to establish whether -coach(Ensminger et al, 2015) might enhance individual director performance or alter group dynamics. Case studies can investigate the varieties of processes and evaluation techniques in use and document contingencies associated with special circumstances (i.e.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate boards

Nordberg

Booth

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose-This paper examines how board evaluations have emerged as an important tool in public policy and corporate practice for enhancing board effectiveness. Design/methodology/approach-We review the extensive literature on effectiveness and the emerging literature on board evaluation to identify ways to assess the current policy direction for external evaluation of corporate boards. Findings-The paper develops an integrated framework of effectiveness that can be used as a tool for board evaluation, in particular for externally facilitated exercises. Research limitations/implications-Through its integration of prior conceptual work this paper advances our theoretical understanding of this emerging part of policy and practice, with to-date lack much empirical basis. Practical implications-The framework we develop shows ways to focus how the practice is conducted by boards and external evaluators alike. Social implications-It can also help policy formation by pointing out the limitations as well as benefits of various policy options. Originality/value-In pointing to ways to develop study of the field through empirical research it provides direction for future academic research. It also identifies a need for and direction toward the professionalization of practice.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate boards

Nordberg

Booth

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Multiple ECB models (Preskill & Boyle, 2008;Labin, et al, 2012) note that a combination of ECB strategies, including coaching and CP, are associated with higher levels of organizational outcomes. In comparison to previous case examples (Arnold, 2006;Stevenson, Florin, Mills, & Andrade, 2002;Taut, 2007;Ensminger, Kallemeyn, Rempert, Wade, & Polanin, 2015), the Unified Outcomes Project focuses on the mechanisms of CP and CPC to highlight a unique approach to ECB that could potentially be used across various foundation contexts.…”

Section: R E S U Lt Smentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To promote evaluation capacity, organizations often need to shift toward a learning framework (Preskill & Boyle, 2008), which requires genuine dialogue, developing trust, open-mindedness, and promoting participation (Preskill, Zuckerman, & Matthews, 2003;Torres & Preskill, 2001). The competencies needed to support an organization's shift extend beyond the technical knowledge of and skills for conducting external evaluations, and requires competencies associated with coaching (Ensminger, et al, 2015). An evaluation coach works with stakeholders to facilitate the development of the attitudes, beliefs, and values associated with conducting evaluations, along with knowledge and skills.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An evaluation coach works with stakeholders to facilitate the development of the attitudes, beliefs, and values associated with conducting evaluations, along with knowledge and skills. Evaluation coaching promotes these dispositions through different types of coaching and the facilitation of various learning processes, such as relating, questioning, listening, dialogue, reflecting, and clarifying values, beliefs, assumptions, and knowledge (Ensminger, et al, 2015;Griffiths & Campbell, 2009;Torres & Preskill, 2001). With an evaluation coach on board, the project began in earnest to:…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Unified Outcomes Project: Evaluation Capacity Building, Communities of Practice, and Evaluation Coaching

Wade¹,

Kallemeyn²,

Ensminger³

et al. 2016

The Foundation Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relational nature of Evaluation Capacity Building: Lessons from facilitated evaluation partnerships

Buckley¹,

Hargraves

Moorman

2021

New Drctns Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the nature and importance of the relationship between Evaluation Capacity Builders (ECBers) and their program partner(s) in the context of the Partnerships for Advancing Character program Evaluation (PACE) Project. PACE, a 3‐year initiative supported by the John Templeton Foundation, offered a unique opportunity to initiate, structure, support, and observe evaluation partnerships between an evaluation professional and a program team over 15 months. In this paper, after reviewing pertinent Evaluation Capacity Building (ECB) and adult education literature, we report on our qualitative inquiry into the PACE Evaluation Partnerships, in response to the following three research questions: (1) What did PACE participants consider to be positive characteristics of or contributing factors to the Evaluation Partnerships? (2) What did PACE participants identify as negative characteristics of or challenging factors to the partnerships? And (3) Are the patterns of positive/negative characteristics and contributing/challenging factors consistent with the hypothesis that relational qualities are important in Evaluation Capacity Building? The results of this analysis indicate that partnerships that were characterized by relational qualities (e.g., responsiveness, trust, mutual respect) tended to be more successful—in the eyes of the people in those relationships—than those that did not. Both the variety of the relationships described by the participants, as well as the emerging patterns, offer fertile ground for future questions about the relational nature of positive ECB relationships.

show abstract

Case study of an evaluation coaching model: Exploring the role of the evaluator

Cited by 13 publications

References 29 publications

Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate boards

Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate boards

The Unified Outcomes Project: Evaluation Capacity Building, Communities of Practice, and Evaluation Coaching

The relational nature of Evaluation Capacity Building: Lessons from facilitated evaluation partnerships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About