Post-normal evaluation?

Abstract

Evaluation evolves, responding to developments in the technical, social, and political environments in which it unfolds as well as influencing how those contexts are to be understood and assessed. Evaluation has typically been understood as a reliable means of providing some assurance in the appraisal of the value of social interventions, but has increasingly been seen as having to address a variety of uncertainties and risks not simply in those appraisals per se but in the design and management of the interventions as well. Some new ways of thinking and forms of evaluation practice linked to planning and decision making are emerging reflecting assumptions of unpredictability as well as incompleteness, instability, and a plurality of perspectives in value determination. This may signal the emergence of “post-normal evaluation.” This article explores several key features of this development.

Evaluation Criteria for Evaluating Transformation: Implications for the Coronavirus Pandemic and the Global Climate Emergency

“…Thus, the revised DAC criteria remain mired in the logic of “normal evaluation” fixated on effectiveness, efficiency, control, and continuity (Schwandt, 2019; Vataja & Parkkonen, 2019). In contrast, “postnormal” evaluation acknowledges, confronts, and engages with complexity, unpredictability, wicked questions, incompleteness, contradictions, turbulence, instability, “a plurality of perspectives in value determination” (Schwandt, 2019, p. 317), systems thinking, and, quintessentially, transformation. Normal evaluation relishes the lessons that flow from hindsight; however, alluring, and seductive but ultimately ephemeral, such lessons are generalizations that decay more rapidly than the half-life of radioactive particles.…”

Towards systemic evaluation in turbulent times – Second-order practice shift

“…Second-order evaluation practice can be in support of enabling post-normal evaluation practice which is needed to respond to the post-normal characteristics of our time and the near future. Schwandt (2019) argues that the conventional understanding and practices of 'normal' evaluation are no longer sufficient. It is time for 'post-normal' evaluation to come to the fore to more adequately deal with complex situations of change and uncertainty, he claims.…”

“…works by Schwandt (2015, 2017, 2018) and Schwandt and Gates (2016). Recently, Schwandt (2019) has signalled the emergence of ‘post-normal evaluation’: mirroring the now established discourse of ‘post-normal science’ (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1993).…”

Competencies, Self‐awareness, and Practice: Notes on My Reading of Chapters 5–7

“…For example, House (2020) has written to suggest ways to strengthen evaluation' s role in a changing society. Agreeing with Schwandt (2019), the article takes the position that evaluation has entered a postnormal phase where evaluation products are losing credibility and effectiveness, largely because society has become so fragmented that once accepted criteria and methods are no longer universally supported; instead the findings may be contested and even the basic legitimacy of the process disputed. Of course, evaluators continue to work under expectations for their performance on each assignment and across the range of assignments that mark their career.…”