Outcome Mapping: Training in Italy

Last week I travelled to Bologna, Italy to attend the Centre for International Development Summer School on Outcome Mapping. The summer school focused on planning, monitoring and evaluation tools that allow programme managers to plan, implement and report on their outcomes in dynamic environments where development results can be both planned and unanticipated.

What is Outcome Mapping?

Outcome mapping is a set of tools used for planning, monitoring and evaluating interventions aimed at bringing about social, economic or technological change. Outcome mapping focuses on engaging the different actors needed to contribute to systemic change and is founded on the idea that to succeed, an intervention needs to involve multiple stakeholders who have different inter-relationships, goals and definition of success. SHARE has been using outcome mapping to plan, monitor and evaluate research uptake from national and international stakeholders.

Main take-aways for SHARE

The event provided a fantastic opportunity to learn from others who are practising outcome mapping on diverse projects around the world as well as to deepen my knowledge and understanding of the approach.

It was especially useful to gain a stronger understanding of the principles behind outcome mapping as well as realising there was a lot of flexibility and adaptability around how to apply the tools and approach.

SHARE has adapted ODI’s Rapid Outcome Mapping Approach (ROMA) to suit our needs so I found it particularly helpful to discuss approaches for applying single or mixed elements of outcome mapping without necessarily using the entire process (which has twelve steps). It was also really interesting to reflect on how different SHARE partners had made the process their own; for instance, WaterAid placed a very strong focus on articulating their vision and mission in the Intentional Design stage whereas other partners have spent more time on developing progress markers.

I also realised that there were some components of outcome mapping that it could be really useful to focus on more strongly. We could use strategy maps to assess the different approaches used to influence our stakeholders and consider diversification of these strategies. We could also look at organisational practices in order to ensure the SHARE team stays relevant, viable and effective. These organisational practices include looking for new ideas and opportunities, experimenting with new approaches, seeking feedback from partners and consulting people outside the organisation with expertise.

Common M&E challenges

There were some fascinating group discussions on the challenges and tensions of M&E such as: whether we are collecting data for accountability or learning, and how to be ethical about using data that is collected for a particular function. We also talked about using adaptive management approaches or sticking to pre-defined goals and some of the M&E challenges this tension creates.

We discussed the risk of basing indicators on what is measurable rather than on what change we want to influence and contribute towards, noting that indicators should not become our objective. I realised that outcome mapping has an actor-centred and systems approach so traditional M&E recommendations such as SMART indicators may not always be helpful for progress markers.

We also discussed challenges around monitoring outcome mapping data and realised that different approaches come with various advantages and disadvantages.

Final reflections

I left the training feeling inspired about the potential for developing and tailoring outcome mapping to better meet the needs of SHARE and its partners. I also now have a rich resource and network of outcome mapping practitioners to draw upon and share ideas with.