Four Keys to Success (Theory, Implementation, Evaluation, and Resource/System Support): High Hopes and Challenges in Participation

Abstract

In this article, I attempt to merge two themes. First, there is often a large gap between high hopes about impacts of policies or programs and the demonstrated results. I describe four keys/threats to success in any social problem area: theory, implementation, evaluation, and resource/system support. Second, I present theory and research from over 30 years of work on participation, conducted by my colleagues and myself that can illuminate and be illuminated by theory, implementation, evaluation, and resource/system support. I offer ideas for solutions that increase the probability of success. I conclude with the need to have high hopes tempered by theory and research to develop realistically ambitious solutions to social problems.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Albee, G. W. (2006). Psychologist sought social cures. The Washington Post, B06.

  2. Anderson, A. (2005). An introduction to theory of change. Evaluation Exchange, Summer, Volume XI, 2. http://www.hfrp.org/evaluation/the-evaluation-exchange/issue-archive/evaluation-methodology/an-introduction-to-theory-of-change.

  3. Bandura, A. (2004). Health promotion by social cognitive means. Health Education & Behavior, 31(2), 143–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown, C. (1984). The art of coalition building: A guide for community leaders. New York, NY: American Jewish Committee.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Butterfoss, F. D. B. (2007). Coalitions and partnerships in community health. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chinman, M., Hunter, S. B., Ebener, P., Paddock, S. M., Stillman, L., Imm, P., et al. (2008). The Getting To Outcomes demonstration and evaluation: An Illustration of the prevention support system. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 206–224.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Chinman, M., Imm, P., & Wandersman, A. (2004). Getting To Outcomes 2004: Promoting accountability through methods and tools for planning, implementation, and evaluation. (No. TR-TR101). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. Available at http://www.rand.org/publications/TR/TR101/.

  8. Chinman, M., Imm, P., Wandersman, A., Kaftarian, S., Neal, J., Pendleton, K. T., et al. (2001). Using the Getting To Outcomes (GTO) model in a statewide prevention initiative. Health Promotion Practice, 2, 302–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chinman, M. T., & Wandersman, A. (1999). The benefits and costs of volunteering in community organizations: Review and practical implications. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28(1), 46–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dalton, J., Elias, M., & Wandersman, A. (2007). Community psychology: Linking individuals and communities (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Daniels, R. S., & O’Neil, C. (1979). The reverse RFP. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1(1), 43–44.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dienstbier, J. (2006). Editorial column. International Herald Tribune.

  13. Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 689–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fetterman, D. M. (1996). Empowerment evaluation: An introduction to theory and practice. In D. M. Fetterman, S. J. Kaftarian, & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment & accountability (pp. 3–46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fetterman, D., Kaftarian, S., & Wandersman, A. (Eds.). (1996). Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fisher, D., Imm, P., Chinman, M., & Wandersman, A. (2006). Getting to outcomes with developmental assets. Minneapolis: Search Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R. M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Florin, P., Chavis, D., Wandersman, A., & Rich, R. (1992). A systems approach to understanding and enhancing grassroots community organizations: The block booster project. In R. Levine & H. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Analysis of dynamic psychological systems. New York: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Florin, P., & Wandersman, A. (1984). Cognitive social learning variables and participation in community development. American Journal of Community Psychology, 12, 689–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Fromm, E. (1968). The revolution of hope, toward a humanized psychology. NewYork: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Green, L. W. (2006). Public health asks of systems science: To advance our evidence-based practice, can you help us get more practice-based evidence? American Journal of Public Health, 96, 406–409.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Green, L. W., & Kreuter, M. W. (2002). Fighting back or fighting themselves? Community coalitions against substance abuse and their use of best practices. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23(4), 303–306.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Grossman, L. (2006). Time’s person of the year: You. Time Magazine. Accessed August 20, 2008, from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html?aid=434.

  24. Hallfors, D., Cho, H., Livert, D., & Kadushin, C. (2002). Fighting back against substance abuse: Are community coalitions winning? American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 23(4), 237–245.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Heller, K., Price, R., Riger, S., Reinharz, S., & Wandersman, A. (1984). Psychology and community change (2nd ed.). Homewood, IL: Dorsey.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Herbert, W. (2006). The passing of a visionary. Psychotherapy Networker, 1 Sept 2006.

  27. Hingson, R. W., Zakocs, R. C., Heeren, T., Winter, M. R., Rosenbloom, D., & DeJong, W. (2005). Effects on alcohol related fatal crashes of a community based initiative to increase substance abuse treatment and reduce alcohol availability. Injury Prevention, 11(2), 84–90.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hoppenfeld, M. (1967). A sketch of the planning-guiding process for Columbia Maryland. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 33, 398–409.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1978). The social psychology of organizations (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Keener, D. C., Snell-Johns, J., Livet, M., & Wandersman, A. (2005). Lessons that influenced the current conceptualization of empowerment evaluation: Reflections from two evaluation projects. In D. Fetterman & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Principles in practice (pp. 73–91). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kelly, J. G. (1971). Qualities for the community psychologist. American Psychologist, 26, 897–903.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kreuter, M. W., Lezin, N. A., & Young, L. A. (2000). Evaluating community-based collaborative mechanisms: Implications for practitioners. Health Promotion Practice, 1, 49–63.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lesesne, C. A., Lewis, K. M., White, C. P., Green, D., Duffy, J., & Wandersman, A. (2008). Promoting science-based approaches to teen pregnancy prevention: Proactively engaging the three systems of the interactive systems framework. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 379–392.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Livet, M., Courser, M., & Wandersman, A. (2008). The prevention delivery system: Organizational context and use of comprehensive programming frameworks. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 361–378.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Livet, M., & Wandersman, A. (2005). Organizational functioning: Facilitating effective interventions and increasing the odds of programming success. In D. M. Fetterman & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation: Principles in practice (pp. 123–154). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Merzel, C., & D’Afflitti, J. (2003). Reconsidering community-based health promotion: promise, performance, and potential. American Journal of Public Health, 93, 557–574.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Miller, R. L., & Campbell, R. (2006). Taking stock of empowerment evaluation: An empirical review. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(3), 296–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Miller, F. D., Malia, G., & Tsemberis, S. (1979). Community activism and the maintenance of urban neighborhoods. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association. New York.

  39. Nation, M., Crusto, C., Wandersman, A., Kumpfer, K., Morrissey-Kane, E., Seybolt, D., et al. (2003). What works in prevention: principles of effective prevention programs. American Psychologist, 58(6–7), 449–456.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ozer, E., & Bandura, A. (1990). Mechanisms governing empowerment effects: A self-efficacy analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 472–486.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Packard, V. (1972). A nation of strangers. New York: McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Patton, M. (2005). Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context: Take two. American Journal of Evaluation, 26, 408–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health (2003) http://www.mentalhealthcommission.gov.

  44. Prestby, J., & Wandersman, A. (1985). An empirical exploration of a framework of organizational viability: Maintaining block organizations. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 21, 287–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Prestby, J., Wandersman, A., Florin, P., Rich, R., & Chavis, D. (1990). Benefits, costs, incentive management and participation in voluntary organizations: A means to understanding and promoting empowerment. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18(1), 117–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Reich, C. A. (1970). The greening of America. New York: Bantam Books.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Rosenbaum, D. P. (1986). Community crime prevention: Does it work?. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Roussos, S. T., & Fawcett, S. B. (2000). A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health. Annual Review of Public Health, 21, 369–402.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sarason, S. B. (1982). The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Saxe, L., Kadushin, C., Tighe, E., Beveridge, A., Brodsky, D., Livert, D., et al. (2002). The front lines of the war against drugs: Can research help direct policy?. Mass, Waltham: Brandeis University Heller School for Social Policy and Management.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Scriven, M. (2005). Review of the book: Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(3), 415–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Seligman, M. E. P. (1998). Learned optimism: How to change your mind and your life (2nd ed.). New York: Pocket Books.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Shapiro, J. (1982). Evaluation as theory testing: An example from Head Start. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 341–353.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Shapiro, J. Z. (1985). Evaluation of a worksite program in health science and medicine: An application of Stake’s model of contingency and congruence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 7(1), 341–353.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Skinner, B. F. (1948). Walden two. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Slater, P. (1970). The pursuit of loneliness. Boston: Beacon.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Trickett, E. J. (2007). From “Water boiling in a Peruvian town” to “Letting them die”: Culture, community psychology, and the metabolic balance of patience and zeal. Keynote address presented to the Society for Community Research and Action 11th biennial conference in Pasadena Ca.

  59. Wandersman, A. (1979a). User participation: A study of types of participation, effects, mediators and individual differences. Environment and Behavior, 11, 185–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Wandersman, A. (1979b). User participation in planning environments: A conceptual framework. Environment and Behavior, 11, 465–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wandersman, A., Duffy, J., Flaspohler, P., Noonan, R., Lubell, K., Stillman, S., et al. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 171–181.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Wandersman, A., & Florin, P. (2003). Community interventions and effective prevention. American Psychologist, 58(6–7), 441–448.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Wandersman, A., Florin, P., Chavis, D., Rich, R., & Prestby, J. (1985). Getting together and getting things done. Psychology Today, 19, 64–71.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wandersman, A., & Giamartino, G. (1980). Community and individual differences characteristics as influences on initial participation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 8, 217–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Wandersman, A., Goodman, R. M., & Butterfoss, F. D. (2005a). Understanding coalitions and how they operate. In M. Minkler (Ed.), Community organizing and community building for health (2nd ed., pp. 292–313). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Wandersman, A., Imm, P., Chinman, M., & Kaftarian, S. (1999). Getting to outcomes: Methods and tools for planning, evaluation and accountability. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Wandersman, A., Imm, P., Chinman, M., & Kaftarian, S. (2000). Getting to outcomes: A results-based approach to accountability. Evaluation and program planning, 23, 389–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Wandersman, A., Jakubs, J., & Giamartino, G. (1981). Participation in block organizations. Journal of Community Action, 1, 40–47.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Wandersman, A., Snell-Johns, J., Lentz, B., Fetterman, D., Keener, D., Livet, M., et al. (2005b). The principles of empowerment evaluation. In D. Fetterman & A. Wandersman (Eds.), Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Wandersman, L. P., Wandersman, A., & Kahn, S. (1980). Social support in the transition to parenthood. Journal of Community Psychology, 8, 332–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Yates, D. (1973). Neighborhood democracy. Lexington, MA: Health.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Yin, R. K., Kaftarian, S. J., Yu, P., & Jansen, M. A. (1997). Outcomes from CSAP’s community partnership program: Findings from the national cross-site evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20, 345–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This article describes a personal and professional journey of over 35 years. At the 2007 Society for Community Research and Action (SCRA) biennial, I gave an address in recognition of receiving the SCRA award for Distinguished Contributions to Theory and Research. The address was called “Optimism about participation: High hopes and challenges in neighborhood organizations, community coalitions, and empowerment evaluation systems”, and it was a major basis for this article. The article is an attempt to highlight some messages and underlying themes in over 35 years of work, described within a chronological history. At the biennial, I was very pleased to be introduced by Jean Ann Linney, whose remarks are also published in this volume.

I would like to gratefully acknowledge the enrichment of the work described in this article by the colleagues I have collaborated with over the years (many of whom are cited in this article). I am thankful for the thoughtful comments of many who have helped me think about many previous drafts of the article including: Victoria Chien, Steven Goldstein, Jason Katz, Jim Kelly, Cathy Lesesne, Jean Ann Linney, Emily Novick, Lois Pall Wandersman, and members of my graduate classes in community psychology.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Abraham Wandersman.

Appendix

Appendix

An illustration of High Hopes for Participation and Challenges to Participation at the National Level (and International Level): The Velvet Revolution

I have been struck by the idea that the themes of optimism, high hopes, challenges, and realities about participation and democracy, and about the need for resource/systems support to help prevent “failures,” can easily be illustrated at the national and international levels as well as the community level.

When I first began to think about my Society for Community Research and Action (SCRA) award presentation and this article, I was returning from a conference in Moscow and was fortunate to read an October 8, 2006 editorial column in the International Herald Tribune by Jiri Dienstbier. He became foreign minister of Czechoslovakia after the Velvet Revolution of 1989, when Czechoslovakia was freed from Soviet domination. I read this column at an airport in Germany on the way home from a trip to Russia with my family (interestingly, on the same day that I read about the assassination of a Russian journalist who had died on the day before we left Russia; she had been a consistent critic of her government).

The following excerpts from Dienstbier’s editorial vividly capture optimism, high hopes, challenges, as well as realities about participation and democracy, and the need for resource/systems support to help prevent flaws or failures:

In the space of a week, I moved from being a dissident forced to stoke boilers in the Prague metro system to being foreign minister, and within a month Vaclav Havel was the new president of Czechoslovakia. Photographs of Germany’s foreign minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, and myself cutting a path through the barbed wire that had long marked the frontier between our countries were beamed around the world as a symbol of the fall of the Iron Curtain.

For my generation, our return to the European cultural space that our country had always belonged to was a dream come true. In the years before 1989, a few of our citizens had collaborated with the regime, but most had made up a silent majority that did not. A few kept a small candle of hope burning by joining the active opposition through literary or journalistic work in samizdat form, or for foreign media and radio stations.

Freedom’s victory would have been fulfillment enough for any one person’s lifetime. More than 90% of Czechoslovak citizens enthusiastically took part in the first free elections to express their joy at the regime’s demise and the restoration of democracy. But in their euphoria, they expected more than was possible.

When the Civic Forum began in the autumn of 1990 to dissolve into political parties and movements that inevitably became a demagogic process. As after the liberation of any society, some people who proved unable to find positive or creative roles began to relive the struggles of our recent past. Suddenly we found there were many latecomers to the fight against Communism who were now compensating for their lack of courage before November 1989.

Then came the controversies that led to the dissolution of Czechoslovakia. The division was peaceful and Czech–Slovak relations have been better than we might have expected, possibly because both sides wished to make up for feelings of failure. Nevertheless, it was generally perceived that the unitary state had not been dissolved by the people but by the authoritarian winners of the Czech and the Slovak elections.

During the privatization drive of the 1990s, many assets of value were lost, and some were stolen. The economic cost has since been estimated at up to a full year of our gross national product. Some people wanted to get rich quickly, and didn’t care how they did it. Corruption penetrated Czech society, and has proved difficult to wipe out.

Today, the Czech Republic is a typical democratic country. Our problems are partly Czech, and still partly post-Communist, but more and more they are the challenges common to modern civilization. Citizens’ dissatisfaction is growing everywhere, and participation rates in elections are dwindling, while public confidence in government, Parliament and the whole political process is ebbing away.

Most members of Czech society know, however, that even an imperfect democracy is better than the former regime, which early on murdered hundreds of people and sent hundreds of thousands to concentration camps; and even during its long years of decay after the death of Stalin, continued to persecute independent-minded people.

Seventeen years after the Velvet Revolution, we Czechs still don’t have an exemplary political scene - but who does? The liberation of creative potential has, however, led to an extraordinarily successful growth of the economy and our standard of living. I was over 50 when I learned how to use a computer, an almost inaccessible article in 1989. Today, young people browse and surf the Internet as if it has been here forever, and even in elementary schools most children have mobile phones.

One can readily ask about theory flaws. For example, the theory of a quick change to democracy may have led to a quick breakup of the country and also to corruption. At the same time, however, one can also point to successes (e.g., an open society where technology is thriving and people feel free). Two potential implementation flaws are that the laws were not well implemented, and not enough oversight was provided to prevent corruption in the democracy. Some potential evaluations flaws are questions about the appropriate indicators of success, which indicators were actually assessed, who conducted the evaluation, and choice of comparison countries. As for potential system/resource flaws, there may not have been sufficient support (e.g., from other countries or the U.N.) to nurture a democracy in a country which did not have a democratic culture.

To me, the Czech example is an illustration of high hopes and challenges, optimism and reality. I wonder what might have happened if there was a clearer theory of change for Czechoslovakia to guide the transition, if the implementation of changes were made with fidelity and/or quality adaptation, how different segments of the population would evaluate the outcomes, and whether there could be more supportive systems (e.g., from the United Nations) to help guide a transition to democracy with greater financial assistance and training.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wandersman, A. Four Keys to Success (Theory, Implementation, Evaluation, and Resource/System Support): High Hopes and Challenges in Participation. Am J Community Psychol 43, 3–21 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10464-008-9212-x

Download citation

Keywords

  • Participation
  • Theory
  • Implementation
  • Evaluation
  • Resource/systems support