Evaluation and impact assessment are complicated processes. This is especially true when looking at intrinsically complex, intangible and often ill-defined processes such as organisational capacity building. This is a rapidly changing field, with definitional problems, methodological debates, contradictory criticisms, and uncertainty as to the main purpose of such assessment processes.

While much progress has been made there are still a number of issues that need to be addressed.

Characteristics of organisational capacity building

It is important to understand the particular characteristics of organisational capacity building. Is there a need to develop more appropriate approaches tailored to these characteristics in order for organisational capacity building to be effective?

This includes exploring whether it is possible or desirable to make a direct link between cause and effect (i.e. between effective organisations and development change).

Any innovative, appropriate and accessible impact assessment approaches that are developed would also need to:

• measure what is important, not merely what is easy
• use a variety of quantitative and qualitative processes
• recognise and respond to the needs and agendas of different stakeholders
• capture the complex nature of organisational change with clarity and flexibility
• involve a greater participation by local communities and incorporate their experiences.
• use methods to analyse and consolidate information from different sources with consistency and comparability
• balance ‘core’ principles – such as trust, ownership, reliability, and legitimacy – with flexibility to adapt to differing contexts.

Linking to organisational learning

Impact assessments seem to be more effective where they are linked to improved practice within an organisational environment where learning and experimentation is prioritised. Only then can information collected and knowledge shared be used constructively for critical reflection and improved practice.

However, currently there are few incentives for learning and openness. Without an explicit recognition of power imbalances, many participating organisations feel insecure about disclosing limitations or failure where this may be linked to funding considerations. The recent shift in emphasis from control and accountability towards learning offers room for optimism, but more could be done to address this constraint.

Recognising the value of investing

It is vital to provide the necessary investment of time and resources, both human and financial. Successful impact assessment depends on a significant investment of funds.

This needs to be recognised by participating organisations and donors. Otherwise, these processes will be poorly implemented, generate little information of operational value and suffer from limited credibility. Impact assessment should be seen as an investment that can add value to the organisation’s ability to learn rather than as an additional cost.