Dialogic evaluation and inter-organizational learning: insights from two multi-stakeholder initiatives in sport for development and peace

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this manuscript is twofold. First, this manuscript explores how dialogic evaluation (DE), as a participatory evaluation tool, develops inter-organizational learning (IOL). Second, based on empirical analysis, the work provides pragmatic insights to support practitioners in implementing a facilitative framework grounded in DE for the increased uptake of IOL. Design/methodology/approach Two cases of multi-stakeholder partnerships in sport for development and peace (SDP) in Italy were analyzed and compared to explore whether and how the implementation of DE supported the development of IOL. Findings In both cases, applying a three-phase DE process supported several IOL outcomes, such as common knowledge, new innovative solutions development and transfer of new acquisitions. Indeed, DE promoted three key IOL objectives: the emergence of latent relational dimensions and issues to bridge multiple levels; intra- and inter-redefinition and intersection of boundaries; awareness of relevance and usefulness of what was accomplished during the partnership. This paper also discusses some practical insights for DE methodology implementation to activate IOL. Originality/value This research contributes to the understanding of an effective IOL by developing synergies from network interactions. Moreover, the researcher applied a novel methodology, DE, in IOL’s research domain, focusing on a different context and setting such as SDP.

What drives young workers? Person‐organization fit‐in identity motives—A mixed‐method study

“…This means investing in projects that promote the motivational notions stated in this study by undertaking ongoing dialogue with younger staff members and developing communication strategies for generating innovative ideas, training, and sharing and establishing new meanings around work (Gorli, D'Angelo, & Corvino, 2022). Organizations should also develop or consolidate a culture of participation and ongoing evaluation to monitor and appraise the effectiveness of staff policies and procedures in place (Corvino, Gazzaroli, & D'Angelo, 2022) as well as introduce concrete actions and initiatives that meet the needs of young workers in forming their work identity. The engagement in meaningful actions, both within the internal work environment and on the outside (the social responsibility to create an inclusive and cohesive job environment, the impact on the market and toward the stakeholders), is particularly powerful in motivating younger staff.…”

Taking Care of Forced Migrants Together: Strengths and Weaknesses of Interorganizational Work from the Perspective of Social Workers

“…These recommendations, however, may not always be easy to implement, so it would be desirable to activate in parallel training/accompaniment courses that can help professionals and organizations develop specific network skills in this field [57]. These kinds of interventions require specific skills, such as psychological skills.…”

Organisational learning and competence for boundary crossing

“…Following in this tread, Corvino et al (2022) explore the use of DE, as a participatory evaluation tool to foster IOL in between public and third sector organisations involved in sport as a developmental and social activity. They propose DE as a facilitative framework to guide practitioners in increasing IOL relationship building, redefinition of sectoral boundaries and awareness of relevance of the partnership for learning.…”

“…Anand and Brix's (2021) paper explored recent tendencies and emerging themes within the public sector exploring the intersection of organisational learning and learning organisation. Corvino, Gazzaroli, and D'Angelo (2022) explored the use of dialogic evaluation (DE) as a participatory evaluation tool to foster inter-organisational learning (IOL) across public and third sector organisations involved in sport as a developmental and social activity. Finally, the individual ability to deal with various aspects of complexity was tackled in Törmänen, Hämäläinen, and Saarinen (2021) through the concept of systems intelligence (SI).…”