Valuing process too
Valuing a process
!Rule some assessment of the process A whole project
We can of course also have values attached to how something is done as well as outcomes and the ordinary sense of the word. For example a humanitarian imperative.
Theorymaker treats these kinds of values in just the same way as any other. For example, given a rich variable showing quantity quality and methods of an implementation variable, define upon it a defined variable which records some important aspect of the way in which it is carried out, and this variable can be valued.
Process is very important for most organisations, and explicitly so for some.
Examples include also gender sensitive processes.
Important to understand that the “project” Variable in the example above is a rich Variable which may include Mechanisms, not just Variables.
!Rule some assessment of the process e.g. was it gender-sensitive? !valued Some outcome !valued Various intervening Variables;B;C !do Some intervention
Other names for valued Variables?
So a valued Variable could be a no-yes Variable like “the law is passed” or a lo-hi Variable like “the child’s happiness”. It might be very concrete like “parts of soot per cubic metre of street-level air” or cleverly defined like “outputs divided by inputs”.
Quite surprisingly, there doesn’t seem to be an English word for “valued Variable”.
- “Target” usually has to do with cut-off numbers
- “Aim” is usually a no-yes Variable
- “Outcome” fits for some Variables but not really for defined Variables like “outputs per input” or how Variables like “project completed in a gender-sensitive way”.
Single way to cope with both project “outcomes” and other values
… Like the Red Cross Fundamental Principles, which are quality criteria regardless of the planned outcomes of a particular project.
This is a good thing, because it can be hard to combine them in an evaluation ToR.