google-site-verification: googlefccb558c724d02c7.html

Translate

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Online Results-Based Management Training: The University of Wisconsin's Logic Model development course


The University of Wisconsin’s excellent online interactive Logic Model training is a valuable, easy to use introduction to RBM – and it is free.

Level of Difficulty:  Easy to moderate
Primarily Useful as: An introduction to RBM and Logic Models
Length: 3-5 hours if used online, 216 pages in the PDF format
Limitations: Some of the links are out of date

Who this is for

Like other consultants and trainers who work on international development issues, I usually work with groups, either donor or implementing agencies, training 10-200 people on RBM.  This reduces the cost (to them) of the training time, travel and other expenses.  But readers of this site or the RBM Training website sometimes ask if I can provide training on results based management  for individuals.  This would, however, be so expensive  that it would not be practical.  Other options such as enrolling in university courses in Europe or Canada might work, but often require more time, and again, more money, than an individual might be prepared  to invest.

But there is online, an excellent resource available to introduce RBM to anyone  who has no experience with RBM – or,  for that matter, to refresh even the most jaded RBM practitioner’s interest. This is the University of Wisconsin Extension Department’s Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models.  Developed in 2002, and put online in 2003, there is very little in this easy to use and interactive course, that is not still relevant today, in 2011, to those who are trying to understand how to use results-based management.


Format: Interactive Online learning and a downloadable PDF


This course has both an interactive online format, and for those who don’t want to, or cannot use the internet for the 2-5 hours completion of the course takes, a PDF version of the course.  The real charm of this course, however, is that it is interactive, and it is the engaging nature of the interaction that cannot be replicated in the downloadable PDF.  Presentations, in the course’s 7 sections, both audio and text, are supplemented with pop-up windows which participants can view, if they want additional examples or references,  followed with exercises and then feedback on the answers.

University of Wisconsin Extension Online Logic Model Training
Copyright: 2002 Board of Regents, University of Wisconsin


It should not be surprising that the interactive elements are as engaging as I found them to be, because this site was developed by a team of content and technical experts, Ellen Taylor-Powell, Larry Jones   and  Ellen Henert at the Extension Department of the University of Wisconsin  – and extension departments are almost always the group in any university the most skilled in tailoring learning events to learners’ needs and learning styles.

Each of the course’s 7 sections contains the following elements:

A Section overview page, which includes

  • Introductory audio
  • Section learning objectives
  • Printable section outline to help users track their progress
  • Content presentation 
  • Activities that require us to put into practice the theory on the preceding pages.
A discussion of some technical limitations, and the reasonably good alternatives the course uses, are included at the end of this post.


Course Contents: Reinforcing important lessons about RBM



The course title is Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models, but it deals with all of the associated elements of results-based management, not just the Logic Model.  Nothing in it will be a major surprise to people who work regularly with RBM, but the what this course teaches users about results-based management is worth repeating, simply because these lessons are often neglected or ignored, by even the most experienced users of RBM.

The course has 7 content sections, each of which generally takes between 20-40 minutes to complete.


What is a Logic Model?


Section 1 discusses the difference between Outputs and Outcomes, the need to test assumptions, and identify risk.  This section covers 20 screens in the course, and runs from pages 7-58 in the downloadable PDF. The difference is that in the PDF, transcripts of the audio from the online course, and a number of worksheets, are included as text.

This introduction to Logic Models includes, among much else, an interesting interactive Logic Model puzzle, requiring us to test our understanding of sequence, timing, risk and results, placing 20 different statement about a programme into one of 8 categories such as resources, activities, participants, Outputs, Outcomes, assumptions and external factors (or risk).

University of Wisconsin Logic Model course - interactive puzzle
Copyright: 2002, Board of Regents, University of Wisconsin
CLICK image to enlarge


This is not dissimilar to what you can do in a group with paper and scissors, but nevertheless engaging if you are working alone, and trying to ensure you understand the ideas of sequence, scale, change and other factors.


More about Outcomes



Section 2 takes us in detail through the different types of legitimate results that we can see in at individual, group, agency, system, or community levels, and talks about why participation of stakeholders in defining Outcomes is important.

This section includes material about RBM that more than one of the UN development agencies could usefully review.  Some of these agencies – not all, but some important UN agencies - get hung up on completing activities, (Outputs) and never seem to move on, in practice, to assessing whether these lead to any real change, or result (Outcomes).

Section two uses19 screens in the online course, and 32 pages in the PDF, with all of the associated supplementary material which is found in the pop-ups and links, in the online course.


More About Program Logic


Section 3  introduces (or reintroduces to forgetful RBM cognoscenti) the concept of clarifying the logic and assumptions implied in designing activities with the intention of contributing to a result.  It covers theories of change, the complexity of real-life programme logic, results chains – what it calls Outcome Chains -  and whether it is reasonable to claim causality – part of the current discussion on attribution of results to programme or project interventions.

It is important to note here, for those sometimes justifiably cynical about RBM who focus on complexity, that this course itself makes the point that multiple, often unplanned or unforeseen factors can affect results, not just the programme interventions. It also discusses the idea that a simple, linear logic model may not reveal enough of the factors involved in achieving results, and why more complex logic models may be needed to underpin the simple ones that we are often forced to submit to funding agencies.  

Another interactive exercise here, helps us to think through the theory of action behind a programme intervention, and despite the fact that this section has only 9 screens in the online course, and 24 pages in the PDF, the complexity of the interactive exercise on page 7 means it can take well 30 or 40 minutes to finish this section.


University of Wisconsin online Logic Model course, interactive exercise testing theories of action
Copyright: 2002, Board of Regents, University of Wisconsin
CLICK image to enlarge



This exercise is also an example of why, if you can, it is more productive in terms of learning to go to the online course first, before using the PDF, because with the PDF material there is essentially no chance to test your own understanding of the processes, before you see the “answer”.


What does a Logic Model Look Like?



Section 4 discusses why logic models, depending on the situation, purpose and culture involved,  can take many different forms.  There is no single format for Logic Models that suits all needs when the intellectual process of testing theories of change is involved – even though there may be, for any given donor, only one format they want to see.  There are, as the course points out, situations where Logic Models may differ in size and complexity, depending on whether they are being used to test ideas for programme planning, evaluation,  communication or for programme and project managers, the core of implementation activities.

Once again, note to complexity theorists, the course makes the point that logic models need not be simplistic, linear creations, but can be useful in helping agencies and individuals understand the complexity of the systems involved in interventions.

This section takes 8 screens in the online course, and 10 pages in the PDF.


How do I draw a Logic Model?



Section 5 is perhaps the most important of the course because it focuses on the real need to develop logic models as a group, not as an individual.

“As you work through this section, you will appreciate that the best way to construct a logic model is with others. While it may be quicker and easier to work alone, try not to. Many people believe that the real value of logic modeling is the PROCESS of creating one and the understanding and consensus that you build about a program as a result.”[Section 5, screen 1, PDF: p. 127]

I can only say I agree completely. In the Results Based Management training sessions I do with donor agencies, implementing organizations and national partners, feedback suggests that 80-90% of participants were absorbed by the Logic Model development process, sometimes surprised at how often the discussions reveal previously unknown or unacknowledged differences in perception among close colleagues, about what the original problem is, what risks and assumptions they have, and what reasonable results could look like.

5 different approaches to Logic Model development


All of the approaches focus on Logic Model development  a group.  The first four approaches are intended for planning new programmes.  These can be found at the online course, by clicking on the links at the bottom of the screen on creating a logic model for a new programme or on page 136 of the PDF.  All of these approaches begin with the result, and move back to activities and necessary resources.

  1. Start with the Long-term result or Outcome, and move back through mid-term or intermediate results, to short-term results, then to the Outputs needed to achieve these, then back again to activities and finally to inputs.
  2. Start with the long-term desired result, but then move immediately to activities, which is often the primary interest of participants, and then testing whether these will in fact, contribute to short of mid-term results which can logically relate to the long-term result.
  3. Start with the Long-term result, then brainstorm all of the elements that will affect this – activities, short, mid-term results, participants, risks, then sort them out to see if participants agree on the relationships and sequence.
  4. Juxtapose the situation or problem with a long-term desired change or Outcome then move  back through mid-term and short term results necessary to get there, and finally to participants, activities and resources required. This looks similar to the first option, but in fact really does, in practice in groups force those with preconceptions about what the activities should be, to confront the problem clearly, to look for results and then decide what activities and resources are needed.
  5. A fifth approach is also listed separately, on the next screen of the course, and this is for a situation where it is necessary to start logic model development with existing resources and existing activities. 
I have seen this happen where there is a second phase to a project, or where there is just too much institutional inertia to reconceptualize how to approach a problem.  It is essentially an approach focusing, as I see it, on a search for results to justify what is already being done – or as the this course suggests, where an “off the shelf” programme already exists:  Ask about an existing programme why each activity exists, what possible changes it can lead to, and how this can relate to a newly identified problem.
This approach is sometimes necessary, in my experience,  when working on RBM with universities, where activities such as degree course work and research are accepted as the core of university activities, and therefore the starting point for interventions.  It can also be necessary with some government agencies which  also sometimes see every problem through the paradigm of their own mandate and existing expertise.  
Moving such institutions towards a genuine questioning of what is really likely to achieve results is sometimes quite difficult.

How Good is my Logic Model?


Section 6 reviews some of the pitfalls individuals or RBM workshop facilitators may encounter in the development of Logic Models, including:

  • Getting lost in the RBM terminology,
  • Focusing too much on the mechanical aspects of putting activities and results in boxes, without assessing the plausibility of the connections between activities and results,
  • Focusing on – or complaining about – linearity, rather than exploring the complexities that some Logic Model formats can reveal,
  • Confusing the development of a Logic Model with evaluation, (for which it can indeed be a useful tool, but to which its utility is not limited)
  • Perceiving the Logic Model as a panacea for programme or project design or implementation problems, rather than as a tool to help us find possible solutions to such problems,
  • Focusing on production of the paper product, but never using it in practice.

It also makes the point that different people and agencies can use – or require the use of – Logic Models, for different purposes, and that we need to be clear about what this purpose is when we determine in how much detail we will work on Logic Model development.

This section spans 10 screens in the online programme, and 16 pages in the PDF version.


Using Logic Models in Evaluation  - Indicators and Measures


Section 7 reviews how understanding the original problem, assumptions, risk and the intended logic of the results chain can help agencies determine what evaluation questions to ask during different types of evaluations – questions about, and indicators relevant to:

  • The quality of inputs and completed activities (Outputs),
  • Who is participating, and what is the reach of the activities,
  • Assumptions underlying programme design, and selection of activities,
  • Whether results are actually achieved, and to what extent they can be reasonably attributed to the intervention, and
  • External factors –including what many agencies refer to as risk - on the achievement of results, or the failure to achieve results.

    Examination of a Logic Model and how it is formed can provide the foundation for

    • Needs assessments (assessing the original problem, and what can be done about it),
    • Process evaluations (assessment of inputs and the quality of activities)
    • Outcome and Impact evaluations (whether changes occurred and to what extent programme or project activities, and also external factors, may have contributed to such change).

    Section 7 is the longest of the course, with 20 online screens and 49 pages in the downloadable PDF.  The indicator discussions run from screens 9-20 in section 7, and pages 178-205 in the PDF.


    Glossaries and references on logic model development, RBM and evaluation



    The course, formally ends with section 7, but it is worth taking a look at other resources included:

    • The bibliography of references related to results based management and evaluation can also be reached by clicking on “resources” at the top of each screen or on pages 212-216 of the PDF.  The bibliography includes 72 references, 8 of which have clickable links that still appear to be functional.  Most of the 72  articles or references were written between 1994-2003, but it is worthwhile in particular visiting the Centers for Disease Control evaluation resources page which has a lot of very useful, accessible, and in some cases more current, guides on evaluation, logic models and data collection. The link in the bibliography is not current, but the page will automatically redirect to the new location, which I have provided in the previous sentence.

    • 11 additional links on evaluation issues such as questionnaire design, surveys, focus groups, quasi-experimental design and other issues can be found throughout section 7 online, or on page199 of the PDF.

    • Finally, the course also provides links to 15 downloadable logic model worksheets or hints, in PDF and sometimes Microsoft Word format, also under “resources” at the top of each page.  These can also be found scattered throughout the PDF document.


    Limitations - Technical issues:

    Because this course was developed in 2002, most people will have computers capable of making use of the interactive elements of the site – but there are three potential limitations to this, all of which, however, are dealt with in some way by the designers:

    1. A reliable internet connection is needed to use the site, and in many of the places I, and my colleagues have work such connections can be, at times, unreliable.  You might, for example, have a half hour of access to read things like this blog, but it would be frustrating to be interrupted in the middle of this online course.
    Alternative provided: Users can download the 216 page PDF version of the course, which includes the text of the whole course.


     2. Flash is used for the most compelling of the interactive features, such as drag and drop creation of logic models – and this, as I understand it, is unlikely to work for people using Apple products.  Most of the people I work with used Windows-based computers, and have the flash player installed, so this might not be a major problem, but the flash has to be enabled, and some people, and some network administrators, do disable it for security purposes.  The website provides a link to the free download of the flash player, from Adobe. Similarly popup screens and forms provide a wealth of additional detail in every section, and some web browsers may require users to enable these through security settings.
    Alternative provided:  The creators of the site provide an alternative to the use of flash, with some interactive elements, using links.  It is not as compelling from a learning point of view as using the flash elements, but it does permit some interaction.  


    3. The audio portions of the presentation use the “.ram” audio format, and a download of either RealPlayer or one of the alternatives such as VLC player  is required to listen.
    Alternative provided: When I first came across this course, in 2008, there was, essentially just the online version but in 2010 the PDF version was produced and it is a useful reference.  Some of the links in the document are out of date, but many more of them still work, and they are themselves quite useful.

    All of these, and some other technical issues are addressed also in the course online help link  and the Extension department provides an email link for those who may have further questions about the content or format.

    The bottom line:  This is an excellent introduction to results based management, focusing on logic model development, and its design is a credit to its authors' adult education abilities. It does not pretend to replace group workshops but it provides an intelligent, practical, and easy to use walk-through of the main issues in RBM.   PDF technology has moved on since 2002 and it is possible to use both flash and javascript now in PDF files.  It would be interesting to see what the digital media specialists at the University of Wisconsin could do with the PDF version of this course, to introduce some of the dynamic elements of the online course.




    Tuesday, August 02, 2011

    Podcasts 3: BBC's More or Less: Behind the Stats

    Greg Armstrong --

    This BBC Podcast brings indicator discussions to life. BBC radio's weekly podcast More or Less: Behind the Stats   presents an entertaining array of examples of how intelligent people can differ in their interpretations of indicator data, and how to apply common sense to the claims made using statistics, or other quantitative data.
    [edited to update links May 2013]
    BBC Radio's More or Less Podcast

    Level of Difficulty: Moderate and entertaining
    Primarily useful for: Policy makers, senior managers, Project stakeholders, donors, project managers, project monitors, and politicians of any nationality
    Length: 28 minutes (mp3 format)
    Limitations:  22 recent programmes are available for download but many older programmes are available only for listening online.

    Who this is for


    For project managers, donors, project monitors and policy makers who need to maintain a watchful eye on how indicator data are used, More or Less, provides some interesting examples of why it pays to be skeptical of indicator validity and reliability, the claims and the interpretations put on indicator data.


    Background: Surveying Results-Relevant Radio

    This is the third in a series of posts discussing how audio podcasts can reinvigorate thinking on indicators and results.

    The first post in this series discussed the mechanics of downloading and listening to podcasts. The second post surveyed the wide range of available podcasts from the BBC, ABC and National Public Radio  of potential use to people working on results and indicators.

    This post reviews what I think is the single most useful programme on world radio, for people who work with indicators:  BBC's More or Less: Behind the Stats.


    BBC Podcasts



    BBC is not the only source of intelligent programming available on the internet - there are, as I noted in my June 2011 post, several excellent programmes available from ABC, National Public Radio, and other sources.  But BBC radio has by far the widest range of podcasts to choose from.


    Roughly 9 Thousand available BBC podcasts



    The BBC podcast website  the last time I looked (August 2, 2011) had 287 programmes available for download. Of these, roughly half usually fall into categories such as music, comedy, sports, religion or children's programming but 129 programmes fell into the "factual" podcast category.  Each of these programmes has multiple -- some dozens, some hundreds -- of individual episodes available for download, or listening online.

    The BBC Radio 4 website  in early August 2011 listed more than 9,600 individual programme episodes, with almost 9,000 of them still available for listening in some format. This is in the "factual" category alone.  Some are BBC news programmes,  and despite recent cutbacks to the BBC foreign language programming, news is still available in many languages(see links at the end of this article). News programmes often cease to be available more quickly than other documentaries, for obvious reasons of topicality, but the last time I looked, there were roughly 90 available.

    Some of the nearly 9,000 available factual podcasts on radio 4 focus on consumer affairs, arts history or travel.

    But there are several which provide useful but also entertaining insights into the kind of work we do when we think about results and how to describe, measure or report on them.


    More or Less: Behind the Stats



    Of all the programmes I have found online, the most directly and consistently relevant to results-based management is More or Less: Behind the Stats. It has been hosted,  since October 2007, by economist Tim Harford, the engagingly skeptical author of The Undercover Economist, The Logic of Life, most recently Adapt  and many articles for The Financial Times and other publications. Tim Harford brings a common sense and clear language approach to determining whether claims for results, and the use of statistics to support such claims, are credible.

    Respect for Data


    In this, he continues the work of his irreverent predecessor, Andrew Dilnot, currently the chair of a U.K. Commission examining long-term health care for the elderly.  Andrew Dilnot set the tone for More or Less with his no-nonsense approach to data.  As The Guardian recently wrote about the Dilnot report, it is "Rich in evidence and pithy in prose" - and this is, after all, what we need more of, in all of our reporting.

    Dilnot wrote a few years ago that what is important in judging political leaders' claims is "respect for data over wishful thinking", something that could  be said equally of results claimed for development projects.

    "If you'd prefer to be flattered by bogus numbers, to believe that the world changes when you play statistical games, or at least to act as if it does, wrote Dilnot "you are, let's be blunt, delusional and dangerous."

    In a world where political leaders exhort aid workers to base -- and justify -- their programming decisions on indicator evidence, but themselves use evidence as the basis for policy only when it suits their political needs, this is something worth remembering.

    120 Available episodes of More Or Less


    More or Less has been produced since 2005 in association with the Open University  and their site has some supplementary written material. Additional interesting material is available also on Tim Harford’s other websites.

    The programme is updated for downloads every Friday during its broadcast seasons, and appears to have 2-3  broadcast seasons of 7-9 episodes each year.

    The More or Less website had, as of August 2, 2011, 22 episodes available for portable listening in the standard and (easiest to download) format - MP3. (A very rudimentary introduction on how to download and listen to podcasts, is available in my May post.)  Each current episode of More or Less is 28 minutes long, and they cover the period between September 2010 and May 2011, the most recent broadcasts.   An additional 28 streaming episodes of More or Less are available for listening -- but not downloading -- using the BBC Player, covering the period between January 2009 and August 2010.  A new season of More or Less begins in the first week of August 2011, and the September 2010 episodes will probably be archived before the new season ends.

    There are also older More or Less episodes, going back to February 2003, with Tim Harford or Andrew Dilnot,  but there is no point in trying to access those by clicking on the "previous programmes by year" link, because some work, and some don't.  But if you go to the More or Less Archives you can get 73 more episodes.   What is curious about these older archived programmes is that some - such as the earliest available episode of More or Less in February 2003, do have audio you can listen to, albeit in the sometimes problematic ram format, while others, including some later programmes, simply have a written description, but do not, as far as I can see, have an audio component. All six of the More or Less episodes broadcast between February and March 2003 have audio, for example, but none of the six episodes broadcast in January and February 2004 appear to have audio.

    Nevertheless, all things considered, I estimate that that there are probably about 120 episodes of More or Less that you can listen to one way or the other and as the new season arrives there will be more.

    A wide range of indicators


    Each episode of More or Less usually deals with discussions of 5-6 indicator issues. Recent episodes, for example, have included discussions on indicators related to, among many other subjects

    • measuring child poverty
    • calculating civilian deaths in war zones
    • comparing international data on student achievement
    • measuring well-being
    • abuses of statistical significance claims
    • measuring the "fiscal multiplier"
    • how luck, and regression to the mean, can bias data interpretation
    • whether celebrity (or royal) marriages - or crime - lead to jumps in marriage rates
    • calculating the real costs of military interventions
    • how differences in data definitions can bias international comparisons
    • distinguishing between correlation and causation
    • how different  methods of calculating "averages" can affect indicator data


    Using More or Less as a research tool: What the data said about 2010



    While many of the items on More or Less use examples from the United Kingdom, it is easy to see how lessons from the debunking of claims about problems or results, could be applied to other issues, and other countries.

    A useful starting point for anyone wanting to test the More or Less range of issues, is the December 31, 2010 downloadable episode. The MP3 version of this episode can currently be downloaded from the main More or Less website, with 21 others, but it will soon be archived, and then you will need to go to the BBC player version of the programme, where currently the most recent 48 episodes are available, and listen online.


    "The meat and drink of More or Less are the errors and connivances embedded in the statistics which fill each news bulletin" Tim Harford noted in the final programme of 2010.  And this episode illustrates his point, as it produces the most important numbers of 2010, as seen by 7 people who work regularly with indicator interpretation.

    Examining one episode in slightly more detail provides an example, I hope, of how we can use podcasts to stimulate ideas and, with a little effort, further research on indicators. As there are no clickable links in podcasts (at least not in this one), the references below are to the time (in minutes and seconds) into the podcast where you can find the reference.

    Included in the 2010 Year-End summary of indicators in the news:

    Indicator data on crime and social change

    (00:56)
    Daniel Franklin   Executive Editor of The Economist, and editor of The World in 2010 and The World in 2011, discusses the difference between David Cameron's claims on crime and a "broken society" and what the statistics on crime rates, teen pregnancy, smoking and other issues say. Some of this is reflected also in the data on percentage of births to teenage mothers, suggested by National Statistician Jil Matheson (08:24-10:19)

    It is easy to see how these discussions on falling crime rates and the implication for public policy could apply to other countries, such as Germany  the U.S. or Canada 

    Indicators on defence spending

    (02:30 into the episode)

    Cathy Newman, former correspondent for the Financial Times, now political correspondent for Britain's Channel 4 news, and author of the Factcheck Blog contrasts former Prime Minister Gordon Brown's claims that defence spending rose in real terms in recent years, while data on inflation - adjusted spending suggested defence spending had fallen.  She points out the difference between "cash spending" and "real spending", and she also notes that the Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition government will be reducing the defence budget by about 8% in real terms over the next four years.

    Misleading indicators on immigration

    (04:25)

    Tim Harford highlights the need to check indicator data sources, before making extravagant claims. He shows how Liberal Democratic party leader Nick Clegg's election debate claim that 80% of immigrants to the UK came from the European Union, was based on his party's misreading of an Economist article, which referred to students, not immigrants.  The real figure Harford says, and a report in the Daily Telegraph  appears to confirm, is about 39%. It is not known from any of these sources if the use of the faulty data was sloppy party research or careless use of the data in the debate.

    Compared to what? Risk indicators

    (07:30)

    David Spiegelhalter, The Winton Professor of the Public Understanding of Risk  at Cambridge University, talks about the need to put risk indicators in perspective.  He examines risks for the military in Afghanistan, and compares these to the risk of riding a motorcycle on a major highway in the U.K.

    Hans Rosling on the quality of indicator data

    (10:30-18:10)

    In the longest discussion in this episode, Hans Rosling, co-founder of the Gapminder Institute, who will be familiar to many people from his entertaining presentations on indicators , talks about how indicator data on issues such as child mortality and economic growth differ widely country to country in sub-Saharan Africa.

    When questioned about the reliability of indicator data from under-funded African statistical offices, he explains why some indicator data such as child mortality and fertility rates are reliable, while other data on indicators such as maternal mortality and unemployment are not.


    But, Hans Rosling says:

    "It is not countries that have weak indicators. It is certain indicators that are weak for methodological reasons". (13:23)

    There is much more in this interview with Rosling, on:
    • Indicators on fertility;
    • Rates of change to indicators such as child mortality, and economic growth in China;
    • Disaggregating indicator data and defining geographic focus for indicators; 
    • His conclusions about the relationship between economic improvement, good governance and democracy;
    • The difference between ideals and advocacy, and facts.

    Finding an indicator for the "slippery concept" of well-being
    (18:37-20:24)

    Statistician Michael Blastland  former producer of More or Less, co-author with former host Andrew Dilnot of The Numbers Game: The Commonsense Guide to Understanding Numbers in the News, in Politics, and in Life , and author of a regularly published column on the BBC News online Magazine on making statistics relevant to non-statisticians, considers whether insomnia can be taken as an indicator for wellbeing - and concludes "...Well-being: this is a good illustration of how slippery a concept that is and the number of things that might have to go into it".

    Dealing with slippery concepts is something development aid workers will be familiar with.


    Cash as an indicator of bank viability

    (20:26)

    Robert Peston, Business Editor at the BBC  talks about how the amount of cash banks have on hand as a percentage of what they borrowed, is an indicator of possible bank failures. Comparing British banks at the end of 2008, with British banks during the Great Depression, he comes up with some surprising information.  It is presumably still relevant in 2011, but the interview never quite makes clear how

    How Incomplete Data reporting undermines indicator utility

    (22:50)

    Ben Goldacre, a physician, the author of the Bad Science blog, a book of the same name, and a columnist for the Guardian  uses the case of incompletely reported data on the drug reboxetine   to illustrate how published studies on drug effectiveness provide unreliable indicators for safety and effectiveness because of the way data are both withheld, and then reported. While this brief comment focuses on this one drug, his blog has discussed several other examples of how inaccurately reported data on drug trials can be, to put it mildly, unreliable.  These include, within the past year, reviews of a medicine for schizophrenia that may cause diabetes, a diabetes medication that may increase risks of heart attacks  and several critiques on claims for homeopathic medicine.

    This short session of More or Less with Ben Goldacre is of relevance for those involved in results reporting for any field. Checking the methods and context for any research providing us with indicator data, is something that is often neglected as indicators are used in reports on development projects.  Failing to check out the sources for published results supporting results indicators in development projects, however, rarely has such immediately dangerous implications as does careless - or malevolent -  use of indicators  in the field of medical research.

    [Editorial note: February 2012: For an entertaining infographic on Bad Science see the Bad Science Infographic.]


    Limitations:


    Unbundling....other programmes do it:

    As I noted in my previous survey of a number of results-relevant podcasts, several -- such as ABC's Counterpoint unbundle the programmes -- break them down into components that can be downloaded separately.  ABC Radio's The Science Show  makes the case for this when it says:
    "The whole program cut up into separate stories - allows easy skipping from one story to the next so you can pick and choose".  
    What is also useful is that the Science show also makes transcripts available for many episdoes, so having listened to it, it is relatively easy to go back, check data and follow up.

    Some (but not all) episodes of the National Public Radio show RadioLab  also do this quite well, dividing an episode which has its own internal coherence, into 3-4 components available separately and with their own references.  You can see examples of these, among many others, with the May 31, 2011 episode on talking to machines  or the June 2009 episode on randomness and data patterns  (stochasticity).  There may be some BBC programmes that do unbundle their podcasts by themes, but I haven't found them yet.


    Time limits: 

    While the 22 recent episodes (this will undoubtedly change in August 2011 with the new season) are available for download and portable listening, and readers can listen to, but not download, many others  dating back to April 2003, some of the programmes prior to 2005 do not open easily. The easiest to download format - the MP3 versions currently available for the last 22 episodes - are usually only available in that format for a year. So if you want to be sure you can download and save some of the interesting episodes, it is worth skimming the site first, identifying potentially interesting episodes, and downloading them  before they are archived or go to the BBC Player site.  The September 2010 episodes will probably be archived soon.


    Weak research links:

    More or Less is relevant to those who work with results and indicators, but of course it provides just tantalizing summaries of the issues, not the whole picture.  It is natural that many of us would want to do further research online to follow up on the issue summaries in each episode.  This is the whole point of being online - to get access to multiple sources of data.  We can, of course, do our own research, and many of the links I provided earlier in this post when I discussed the 2010 New Year's episode of More or Less, were links I did find myself, through some time-consuming research.

    While the More or Less website has improved since January 2011, and particularly since the April 2011 season, it is still a disappointment that there is so little assistance on the site for further research, particularly for some of the programmes that predate 2011.  The More or Less website does indeed now provide more links that it previously did, both directly and through the Open University link, but there remain occasional problems even in these links.  In at least one case I noted in January 2010 the site misspelled the name of one of the guests (Ben Goldacre)  and that error remains as I write this in July.  Such things prove distracting, and complicate attempts to follow the story online with further search. While it is easy to make errors in writing (and this blog undoubtedly has some) there is a certain irony in finding such an error on the website of a podcast dealing with data integrity.

    Other podcasts such as RadioLab have websites that provide much more in terms of links to further research, and in RadioLab's case, even have a reading list.  None of these other programmes has the direct and frequent relevance to results and indicators that More or Less has, but they are better organized.

    More or Less is, as I have said, the most useful of all of the programmes I have found so far, to those of us who work with results and indicators, and it is disappointing that the website does not make it easier to capitalize on the good work they have done.  More links to background material on the More or Less website would be useful as would even the inclusion of metadata accessible to listeners who might want to go further.


    The Bottom Line:

    More or Less: Behind the Stats, is the most useful programme on the internet for people interested in how indicators are used in daily life, in policy analysis, politics and assessing results.  It is worth listening to, for most people involved with results-based management.  A new season of More or Less begins on August 5, 2011.





    Further Reading, viewing and listening on indicators and results



    For our colleagues working in other languages - BBC foreign-language news

    BBC News in Persian
    BBC News in Mandarin
    BBC News in Cantonese
    BC News summaries and commentary from the press in Turkish
    BBC News in Burmese
    BBC News and commentary in Russian
    BBC News Analysis in Ukrainian
    BBC News in Indonesian
    BBC News in Spanish

    At some associated BBC sites, languages such as Swahili are available, but not as regular news broadcasts.





    Thursday, June 30, 2011

    Podcasts and RBM - 2: Audio Podcasts from the BBC, Australian Broadcasting Corporation and National Public Radio

    Greg Armstrong --

    Radio programmes from the BBC, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and National Public Radio provide stimulating insight into how other people work with and interpret indicators and results. The second of three posts on podcasts surveys the programmes available from these three broadcasters that are relevant to Results-Based Management discussions.


    Level of Difficulty: Moderate-complex, but entertaining
    Primarily useful for: Anyone who wants or needs fresh insights on results and indicators
    Length: Usually Vary from 15 minutes to an hour. (mp3 format)
    Limitations: Audio podcasts are difficult to reference, and follow up, compared to other media.

    Who these programmes are for:

    Some project managers dread discussions of indicator data, possibly because they rarely collect the data.  But many project stakeholders, and those managers who do take the process of indicator development and data collection seriously, often seem energized by the discussions.  Indicator development discussions reveal the different priorities stakeholders have, and what they think results really mean;  and they challenge participants to think critically and creatively about data sources, data validity and the practicality of data collection.   For these people, audio podcasts -- available free on the internet -- can provide though-provoking insights into both results and indicator development.

    This is the second of three posts on audio podcasts.  The first post, originally published May 28, 2011 dealt with the advantages, disadvantages, and mechanics of downloading, listening to, and using podcasts for RBM.  This post surveys results-relevant podcasts available from the BBC,  Radio Australia, and National Public Radio.  The final post will review one programme, BBC’s More or Less, in more detail.

    Thousands of podcasts to choose from

    There are hundreds of possible programmes, and thousands of individual episodes of programmes available for listening, free on the internet.  The BBC website alone had 262 separate available programmes, in January 2011, and by June  had 288 programmes with material available for download.    Of these, roughly were in categories such as music, comedy, sports, religion or children's programming. 122 programmes fell into BBC's "factual" category  in January 2011.  By June 2011 there were 133 factual programmes listed and most of these had  dozens, sometimes hundreds of individual episodes available either for download or listening online -- some  news programmes, in multiple languages, others about consumer affairs, arts, literature, economics or history. 

    The BBC radio 4 website itself suggests that there are over 9,000 episodes of different programmes just in this  “factual” category available for listening in one of its formats, listing them alphabetically and by genre.  Compared to the BBC podcast homepage, which organizes the available programmes into more recognizable categories, the 9,000 available podcasts may seem like a huge and unfathomable number to wade through -- but these radio 4 episodes are worth skimming. Some individual episodes buried there -- such the interesting 2008 Peer Review in the Dock -- do not appear to be listed on the podcast page.

    But this blog is about Results-Based Management and, given that we all have limited time available for listening, the following are suggestions of some of the programmes I think are worth listening to for useful -- but also entertaining -- insights into the kind of work we do when we think about results and how to describe, measure or report on them:

    Results-relevant Podcasts from the BBC


    BBC's More or Less: Behind the Stats, is by far the programme with the most direct link to indicators and results based management, of any I have found.  Each 24-minute episode usually includes 3-4 issues, all of which are directly relevant to how results and indicators can be interpreted. 22 individual episodes dating back to September 2010 are available for download as I write this, and 82 more going back to 2005 are available for listening online. I will review More or Less in more detail in my next post.

    Thinking Allowed, a half-hour programme focusing on social science research, currently has a total of 228 episodes available -- 40 in downloadable MP3 format, dating back to September 2010.  The Thinking Allowed Archives includes broadcasts going back as far as January 2007, using the BBC iPlayer.

    Documentaries  is by far the most prolifically accessible of all of the BBC podcasts.  It had 88 24- minute episodes available, all downloadable, at the end of June -- and this is just for 2011. Another 660 downloadable programmes in MP3 format in the archive from 2007-2010.  Finding these archived materials is not perfectly intuitive, but you can get access to them by going to the BBC factual/history  link where, among many other programmes, the Documentaries for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 are listed.

    Material World, a BBC science programme had 41 half-hour episodes available for downloading the last time I looked, and 350 more in the archives for which the listener will require either RealPlayer or another media player such as VLC, capable of handling the Realplayer files.



    Results-relevant Podcasts from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC Radio)



    ABC radio’s Counterpoint, which is second only to BBC’s More or Less in its relevance to results discussions, delivers weekly one-hour programmes, and also "unbundles" the components – breaks the programme up into shorter segments which can be downloaded or listened to individually.  Thus, you might want to listen to just that part of the Counterpoint February 14, 2011 broadcast on the “decline effect” -- or why much apparently validated published research can’t be trusted – but not those parts of the same  broadcast dealing with Australian politics, limits to  online publishing freedom,  or the morality of long-term debt

    Hiding the pigs…


    The only quibble I have with Counterpoint’s unbundling

    For example, the June 6, 2011 episode of Counterpoint  included three components:  “You’ve got to be rich to work for free”, “Hunters, the real conservationists” and “David Burchell: Anger, politics and the new media”.  Looking at these, you might not, (and I did not) expect that one dealt with the fascinating issue of how Australians are trying to deal with 23 million highly intelligent feral pigs that are roaming the country.   I’m not sure this has anything to do with RBM, but it’s interesting!  When I pointed this out to my colleague Anne Bernard, who first led me to Counterpoint, and someone who listens to every episode in its entirety, her reply was “Armstrong, you have the attention span of a gnat!  Just download the whole programme!”  

    But, if, like me, your attention span argues against downloading an hour of material just to find out about the pigs, you can, as I did, just download the feral pig episode

    And if the pigs don't interest you, there are a number of other topics of potential relevance for results and indicator discussions in recent available podcasts of Counterpoint:



    • The December 6, 2010 episode dealing with the relationship between  expenditures on education and educational outcomes


    • The June 20, 2011 broadcast which contains two interesting indicator-related segments: one on how the quality of data collection instruments can affect data quality, and with it our conclusions about results; and another on what data tell us about the relative contributions to project results and organizational success made by senior management, mid-level project managers, and creative personnel.

    Ockham’s Razor is another ABC programme which takes a slightly more academic approach to issues, with individuals making presentations on simple truths behind complex issues, rather than being interviewed.  The programme has 240 13-minute episodes going back to January 2006 available for download, and a large number of transcripts for programmes as far back as 1997. These include, among much else, discussion of the difficulties of relating and working with a bizarre field of indicators for earthquake prediction, how simple language and basic math can bring policy debates into perspective, and why effective and simple solutions to policy issues are not implemented.

    As an example of how many episodes are available, and on what variety of topics, a search for "evidence" in the Ockham’s Razor archives, produces a list of several hundred presentations.

    A Results-Relevant Programme from National Public Radio



    Radiolab  – a programme from the U.S. National Public Radio produces a one hour episode every two weeks, and these can be downloaded as one entire episode, or you can choose, as with ABC’s Counterpoint, to download component parts of the episode, lasting10-30 minutes each.  The format is much more story-telling than "More or Less" or "Counterpoint", and while dramatic liberties may sometimes be taken with the narratives, there is a lot of interesting material here.  In total, by the end of June 2011, there were 46 one-hour episodes available. Not all of them are obviously related to results or indicators, but they are all worthy of attention.  Two of the episodes I found particularly interesting were:
    • The June  2010 Radiolab episode “Oops”  – which tells three stories about unintended and very negative results, growing out of projects with only good intentions, and 
    • The October 2010 Radiolab episode on "Cities" particularly the component called “It’s Alive?”  that describes how speed (of talking, and walking) can be used as an indicator of city culture   and how physicists have used walking speed to predict city size, average income, crime rates and a number of other variables related to the culture of different cities.


    The bottom line:


    BBC’s "More or Less" and ABC’s "Counterpoint" provide a good starting point for anyone wanting a little entertainment with their results and indicator discussions. There are dozens of other programmes out there that I haven’t covered, and no doubt many more that I am not even aware of.  Many of these may be of interest to you, and may also, as an incidental byproduct of your attention, provide new ways of looking at results and indicators.


    Further listening

    Referenced here:

    BBC: More or Less: Behind the Stats
    BBC: Thinking Allowed
    BBC: Documentaries
    BBC: Material World 
    ABC: Counterpoint 
    ABC: Ockham’s Razor
    NPR: Radiolab
    NPR: Krulwich Wonders

    Other radio programmes of potential interest include:

    BBC: The Reith Lecture Archives 
    BBC: Start the Week, with Andrew Marr
    BBC: Four Thought
    BBC: File on Four 
    Podcasts from the Guardian
    Podcasts from the Scientific American 






    This post edited July 4, 2011 to update links.

    Monday, May 30, 2011

    Podcasts and RBM 1: How to use audio podcasts to reinvigorate thinking on indicators and results

    Greg Armstrong --

    Indicator discussions don’t have to be boring.   A wide range of audio podcasts, easily accessible to listeners throughout the world, are available online from the BBC, ABC and NPR.  This is the first of three posts surveying audio programmes available online, and relevant to results-based management.


    Level of Difficulty: Moderate-complex, but entertaining
    Primarily useful for: People who don’t have experience with downloading podcasts
    Length: Usually Vary from 15 minutes to an hour. (mp3 format)
    Limitations: Audio podcasts are difficult to reference, and follow up, compared to other media.

    Who this post is for:

    This is the first of three posts dealing with how, and which audio podcasts can be useful for people working on results frameworks and indicators.  This introduction explains why podcasts can be useful, what their limitations are, and how to use them. This post is intended primarily for people who do not already know how to get access to, or use podcasts.  

    The second post in this series will survey the broad range of podcasts available primarily from the BBC, Radio Australia and one from the U.S. National Public Radio.  The third post will review in more detail one particular programme on the BBC, More or Less which always has something useful to say about indicators. 

    Those readers who already know how to subscribe to, or download podcasts may wish to skip this post, and move on to the next two.

    Why use audio podcasts in RBM? Because (gasp!) RBM can be boring

    All of us who work with international development projects or with Results-Based Management, are  familiar with the reams of paper, log frames, risk management frameworks and charts, generated in results and indicator discussions.  These can put even the most enthusiastic proponents of results-based management into a coma.

    But there is a range of very entertaining material available for listening, that can reinvigorate interest in how results and indicator data can be manipulated, misrepresented, forged, and in some inspiring instances, creatively interpreted --and not just in politics, or development assistance, but in daily life.  For this, the audio podcasts available for download, or for online listening from a number of sources, are a useful and energizing source of not just learning, but entertainment, for people who work with results and indicator data on a regular basis.

    Podcasts provide an escape from the drudgery of reading about RBM


    I am a late adopter, someone slow to embrace new technologies, after an early, expensive and ultimately futile early adoption of the Betamax in the 1975.  While my closest colleague has for many years been downloading to her MP3 player and listening to not just music but documentaries, and fiction, I only grudgingly started to do so a few months ago, when I began an exercise regime that put me in a boring environment for an hour a day.  Music doesn’t provide the escape for me it does for many people, and I wanted to use the time productively.  Early misguided attempts at reading while exercising  produced unintended (but in hindsight predictably disastrous) results.

    My  colleague pointed me  to the BBC website  and its literally hundreds of podcasts; I continue to use it, but also moved on from there to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation’s smaller but worthwhile set of documentaries and then to the National Public Radio site.  Now I find that an hour of exercise is intellectually productive and, best of all, entertaining.  These podcasts provide insights on how other people deal with results  and indicators in the real world, challenging my understanding of issues, and ways of thinking about them, and providing me with alternative approaches to data analysis, often things that I had skipped over, or forgotten in my daily reading.  Some of these programmes are engrossing enough that I double my exercise time to complete them.


    The drama of results and indicator discussions


    The major attraction of using audio podcasts, for me, is this entertainment value.  It is rare that a discussion, even on apparently boring topics related to results or indicators will make its way to an audio podcast on any of the major radio networks, unless there is an interesting or unusual  twist to it.  These programmes are often presented in a way that will stimulate the listener intellectually or emotionally, sometimes reawakening a dying interest in how to use data productively.

    Listening to politicians or pharmaceutical manufacturers  twist data, and then face the challenge of someone who knows enough to ask pointed and challenging questions, is much more interesting than reading the same discussion in a journal, a newspaper or online.  Debates on issues such as health services, school quality, risk, crime, disastrously unintended results, and a wide range of other topics, can generate new ideas for people working with results frameworks, and struggling to recognize, generate or interpret convincing indicator data.  

    Some programmes such as WNYC’s Radio Lab  deliberately dramatise the discussions to keep listeners involved, and that approach is effective. But most programmes benefit simply from focused questions, good editing, and the energy and passion of the people they are interviewing, to keep a listener’s interest.  Many of them remind me of the best indicator discussions in a project context, when stakeholders understand the importance of indicators for defining results and activities that are important to them, and look forward to and passionately engage in the discussions about what they mean.

    Podcast length

    Most of the podcasts I listen to are about 30 minutes long.  Some programmes such as ABC’s Counterpoint are an hour long, but listeners can download individual components of the episode, that might vary from 10 to 30 minutes in length.  Some sites, such as The Scientific American /, have podcasts that last only a minute or two while others last roughly 15 minutes. ,


    Difficulties in referencing or sharing podcast data


    The primary disadvantage of using podcasts as a source of new ideas is that it is very difficult to footnote or bookmark the programmes. Only a few podcasts provide transcripts of their audio programmes and  among those which do, such as ABC’s Ockham’s Razor , even fewer make use of the primary advantage of the internet – web links.

    With paper,  we can footnote references, drawing attention to individual words, sentences or ideas,  and move back through an article to check consistency or the spelling of a name or an organization.

    With electronic data, available on websites, we can provide links, from a blog such as this, so readers can jump to original or alternative sources, to document or challenge an idea, and readers can easily supplement ideas by using search engines.

    But if you download a podcast, and you find a startling new idea you want to reference, while you are, for example, jogging, climbing stairs, lifting weights, or walking, how do you do it?  I tried carrying a notebook and jotting down the ideas, but this is distracting and sometimes dangerous if you are exercising.
    And it doesn’t work well in the rain.

    In these cases the only useful way to actually use the podcast as a source of potential learning and a reference for other people, (at least as far as I know) is to listen to it on a computer, then go to the podcast home page, to note the web links to the individual podcast, and sometimes to note the running time of the particular quote within the podcast.  Then, too, we can check the website’s home page and links for supplementary information.

    So, while I often start now listening, for example, to BBC’s excellent More or Less  as I exercise, I often end up listening to it again, in front of a computer, where I can pause the programme,  make notes, rewind, or fast forward to relevant sections of the discussion – or jump to the web where I can seek supplementary information.   I will be reviewing More or Less in greater detail in my third post in this series, and the difficulty in referencing individual stories in a programme will be illustrated more clearly in that post.

    In any case, I assume everyone who reads this blog will have access to a computer – so it should be possible to go directly to some of the sites and programmes I list in my next post, and listen to them online.


    The Mechanics of accessing and listening to podcasts


    The most common format for podcasts is MP3. While not providing great sound for music (so I am told) this format is, certainly to my impaired hearing,  good enough to deliver an audible conversation, debate or discussion.  MP3 players such as the iPod all include software to play podcasts automatically.  You can spend a lot of money on MP3 players if you want to, but there are perfectly serviceable models, such as the one I use, available in most countries for roughly $20 U.S.   And if you decide you want to listen to these on the computer, any reasonably modern computer with a media player, such as the ubiquitous Windows Media Player, Apple’s ITunes  or one of the many free alternative media players, will automatically start playing these programmes once you click on them.

    There are also other formats, sometimes proprietary, used by individual websites.  BBC, for example,  while making podcasts for almost all of its programmes available in MP3 format when they are first put on the site, has a few that can only be listened to with its BBC iPlayer, online.  This requires an updated flash player and  I have had uneven success in using this where internet connections are slow. Some older archived BBC episodes from 2005 or earlier, may only be available in the ram format, which requires RealPlayer or an alternative, and these will still start automatically on most computers when you click on the file.  A few of these BBC radio programmes, primarily music, are restricted in places like Canada, by the BBC licensing of its products.

    Listeners can also subscribe to audio programmes through links on the site, or through aggregators such as iTunes, or Google Reader, or directly through links on the podcast webpage. Episodes can then be automatically delivered to the computer or mp3 player.  Personally, I prefer to select the individual programmes, read the background, and download them myself, but many people prefer the convenience of automatic delivery.

    There are, then, as far as I know, two primary ways of listening to some of this excellent material

    a) With earphones, downloaded to an MP3 player or smartphone, or
    b) Through your computer, by clicking the appropriate link.

    Most websites can use all of the major web browsers, but there are sometimes minor differences in how you download a podcast using Google Chrome, or for example,  Internet Explorer,   Opera, Firefox  or Safari. Most of the time, on most of the sites, the link to the specific audio programme or episode you want will give you fairly straightforward instructions, to either click to download, or click to listen at your computer, and where it doesn’t do this, left clicking will usually lead to the programme playing immediately on your computer while right clicking will often download the whole programme to your computer, for listening later either on the computer or on the MP3 player.


    Time limits on available programmes


    Websites vary widely in how long they  will keep  an individual podcast publicly available.  Some do it as a matter of policy for  three months, others for a month, some only for a week and some, such as NPR’s Krulwich Wonders  -- basically a written blog -- appear to have only monthly episodes in audio, but many more episodes as written blog posts that can be read later.

    In the case of the BBC podcasts, the length of time differs depending on the programme.  Some are available for download for years, others for only a week, after which they may completely disappear, or be available only for immediate listening at your computer, but not for download.

    As the BBC’s podcast website help page explains it
     “But please don't forget that once you have downloaded a podcast episode, it is yours to keep forever and will not expire. Unfortunately, if you missed an episode and didn't download it within the period of availability we are not able to send you a copy.”
    So, if you find something that is only potentially interesting, it is worthwhile downloading it for further review first to a computer, and then moving it, if you want, to an MP3 player, or simply keeping it for later listening.   The files, because they are relatively low-fidelity for conversation, do not take up as much space on the computer as would higher fidelity music files.

    What topics are available?

    In my next post I will provide an overview of some of the most interesting radio programmes available, that are relevant to Results-Based Management.

    The bottom line:

    Podcasts can be difficult to work with as references, but they are stimulating additions to the dense written material we work with regularly, and can be a useful additional tool for people who think about and work with results and indicators.


    Further reading on how to listen to podcasts:

    BBC podcast help 
    ABC podcast help
    Apple iTune podcast help 
    Advice on buying MP3 players







    This post edited to update links July 2, 2011

     
    Read the latest posts