Abstract
This chapter draws on complexity literature to outline attributes of complex development programs. Most attributes of complexity—such as dynamism, emergence, adaptation, nonlinearity, and scale—are likely to facilitate program success, but make it difficult to measure that success. In trying to measure success of complex programs, evaluators and program stakeholders often assume the reverse—that these programs are simple, linear, and predictable. An even greater problem is that these assumptions, huge as they are, are taken for granted (implicit); neither explicated nor tested.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, P. (1999). Complexity theory and organization science. Organization Science, 10(3), 216–232.
Anderson, A. (2004). Theory of change as a tool for strategic planning: A report on early experiences. Aspen Institute: Washington D.C.
Cilliers, P. (2000). Rules and complex systems. Emergence, 2(3), 40–50.
Connell, J., Kubisch, A. C., Schorr, L. B., & Weiss, C. H. (1995). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives: Concepts, methods, and contexts. Washington, D.C: Aspen Institute.
Davies, R. (2004). Scale, complexity and the representation of theories of change. Evaluation, 10(1), 101–121.
Davies, R. (2005). Moving from logical to network frameworks: A modular matrix approach to representing and evaluating complex programs in creative commons attribution-non commercial-ShareAlike site. Retrieved [http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:cs98bp1tuXgJ:www.mande.co.uk/docs/MMA.doc+network+software+Visualyzer&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=UK].
Forss, K., Marra, M., & Schwartz, R. (2011). Evaluating the complex: Attribution, contribution, and beyond. New Brunswick: Transactional Publishers.
Holland, J. H. (1992). Complex adaptive systems. Daedulus, 121(1), 17–30.
Johnson, R. B. (1998). Toward a theoretical model of evaluation utilization. Evaluation and Program Planning, 21, 93–110.
Johnson, J. E. V., & Bruce, A. C. (1998). Risk strategy under task complexity: A multivariate analysis of behavior in a naturalistic setting. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11(1), 1–17.
Kassebaum, D. G. (1990). The measurement of outcomes in the assessment of educational program effectiveness. Academic Medicine, 65(5), 293–296.
Lansing, J. S. (2003). Complex adaptive systems. Annual Review of Anthropology, 32, 183–204.
Lverson, A. (2003). Literature review: Attribution & aid evaluation in international development. Ottawa: IDRC Evaluation.
Lycett, M., Rassau, A., & Danson, J. (2004). Program management: A critical review. International Journal of Project Management, 22(4), 289–299.
Mason, S. M. (2001). Simplifying complexity: A review of complexity theory. Geoforum, 32, 405–414.
Mason, R. B. (2007). The external environment’s effect on management and strategy: A complexity theory approach. Management Decision, 45(1), 10–28.
Maylor, H., Brady, T., Cooke-Davies, T., & Hodgson, D. (2006). From projectification to programmification. International Journal of Project Management, 24(8), 663–674.
Mayne, J. (2011) Contribution analysis: Addressing cause effect. In K.Forss, M. Marra & R. Schwartz (Eds.), Evaluating the complex: Attribution, contribution, and beyond (pp. 53–96). New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transactional Publishers
Newton, A. X. & Llosa, L. (2010) Toward a more nuanced approach to program effectiveness assessment: Hierarchical linear models in K–12 program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(2), 162–179
Partington, D. (2000). Implementing strategy through programmes of projects. In J. R. Turner & S. J. Simister (Eds.), Gower handbook of project management (3rd ed., pp. 33–46). Aldershot: Gower.
Patton, M. Q. (2010). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York: Guilford Press.
Pawson, R., Wong, G., & Owen, L. (2011). Known knowns, known unknowns, unknown unknowns: The predicament of evidence-based policy. American Journal of Evaluation, 32(4), 518–546.
Pellegrinelli, S. (1997). Programme management: Organizing project based change. International Journal of Project Management, 15(3), 141–149.
Reiss, G., Anthony, M., Chapman, J., Leigh, G., Payne, A., & Rayner, P. (2006). Gower handbook of programme management. Aldershot: Gower.
Rogers, P. (2005). Evaluating complicated—and complex—programs using theory of change. Evaluation Exchange, 11(2), 13.
Shao, J., Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2012). Measuring program success. Project Management Journal, 43(1), 37–49.
Stacey, R. D. (2002). Strategic management and organizational dynamics: the challenge of complexity (3rd ed.). Harlow: Prentice Hall.
Stame, N. (2004). Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. Evaluation, 10(1), 58–76.
Wolman, H. (1981). The determinants of program success and failure. Journal of Public Policy, 1(4), 433–464.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Nkwake, A.M. (2013). Attributes of Complex Development Programs. In: Working with Assumptions in International Development Program Evaluation. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4797-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4797-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-4796-2
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-4797-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)