架起展望与评估之间的桥梁:值得搭建的桥梁

Q2 Social Sciences
Annette L. Gardner, Rick Davies, Thomas Kelly
{"title":"架起展望与评估之间的桥梁:值得搭建的桥梁","authors":"Annette L. Gardner, Rick Davies, Thomas Kelly","doi":"10.1002/ev.20605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Focusing on and supporting the integration of two overlapping but siloed disciplines is an exciting but uncertain endeavor. We can anticipate ambiguity in that it is an exploratory activity, as well as novelty in that we don't know exactly where we are going until we get there. However, we are sure it is worth the effort. As evidenced by the papers in this volume, evaluation and futures studies are two disciplines that have much to offer one another. Evaluation can inform the quality and effectiveness of foresight initiatives, such as whether an environmental scanning system surfaces signals of change that supports organizational long‐term thinking and preparedness. Systematically thinking about the future can free evaluation from being a primarily hindsight‐based discipline and activity and enable it to play a more active role in informing strategy and decision‐making that benefits evaluators, clients, and the program. Looking across this volume's papers, and beyond, we identify themes important to advancing foresight evaluation thinking and practice. In particular, we focus on how foresight thinking and methods can inform evaluation practice (and vice versa), the foresight capacity required on the part of evaluators, and the evaluation capacity that foresight practitioners currently have. Additionally, we provide some observations on gaps and challenges, and recommend ways that evaluators can look inward and outward to advance their foresight evaluation practice.","PeriodicalId":35250,"journal":{"name":"New Directions for Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Bridging foresight and evaluation: A bridge worth building\",\"authors\":\"Annette L. Gardner, Rick Davies, Thomas Kelly\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ev.20605\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Focusing on and supporting the integration of two overlapping but siloed disciplines is an exciting but uncertain endeavor. We can anticipate ambiguity in that it is an exploratory activity, as well as novelty in that we don't know exactly where we are going until we get there. However, we are sure it is worth the effort. As evidenced by the papers in this volume, evaluation and futures studies are two disciplines that have much to offer one another. Evaluation can inform the quality and effectiveness of foresight initiatives, such as whether an environmental scanning system surfaces signals of change that supports organizational long‐term thinking and preparedness. Systematically thinking about the future can free evaluation from being a primarily hindsight‐based discipline and activity and enable it to play a more active role in informing strategy and decision‐making that benefits evaluators, clients, and the program. Looking across this volume's papers, and beyond, we identify themes important to advancing foresight evaluation thinking and practice. In particular, we focus on how foresight thinking and methods can inform evaluation practice (and vice versa), the foresight capacity required on the part of evaluators, and the evaluation capacity that foresight practitioners currently have. Additionally, we provide some observations on gaps and challenges, and recommend ways that evaluators can look inward and outward to advance their foresight evaluation practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Directions for Evaluation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Directions for Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20605\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Directions for Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20605","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

关注和支持两个相互重叠但又各自为政的学科的整合是一项令人兴奋但又充满不确定性的工作。我们可以预见到它的模糊性,因为它是一项探索性的活动,也可以预见到它的新颖性,因为在到达目的地之前,我们并不知道我们究竟要去哪里。不过,我们确信这是值得付出努力的。正如本卷中的论文所证明的那样,评估和未来研究是两门可以相互借鉴的学科。评估可以为展望活动的质量和效果提供信息,比如环境扫描系统是否能发现支持组织长期思考和准备的变革信号。对未来进行系统思考,可以使评估摆脱事后诸葛亮式的学科和活动,使其在为战略和决策提供信息方面发挥更积极的作用,从而使评估者、客户和项目受益。纵观本卷论文及其他论文,我们发现了一些对推进前瞻性评价思维和实践具有重要意义的主题。特别是,我们关注展望思维和方法如何为评估实践提供信息(反之亦然)、评估人员需要具备的展望能力,以及展望实践者目前具备的评估能力。此外,我们还就差距和挑战提出了一些看法,并建议评估人员可以采取内向和外向的方 式来推进展望评估实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Bridging foresight and evaluation: A bridge worth building
Focusing on and supporting the integration of two overlapping but siloed disciplines is an exciting but uncertain endeavor. We can anticipate ambiguity in that it is an exploratory activity, as well as novelty in that we don't know exactly where we are going until we get there. However, we are sure it is worth the effort. As evidenced by the papers in this volume, evaluation and futures studies are two disciplines that have much to offer one another. Evaluation can inform the quality and effectiveness of foresight initiatives, such as whether an environmental scanning system surfaces signals of change that supports organizational long‐term thinking and preparedness. Systematically thinking about the future can free evaluation from being a primarily hindsight‐based discipline and activity and enable it to play a more active role in informing strategy and decision‐making that benefits evaluators, clients, and the program. Looking across this volume's papers, and beyond, we identify themes important to advancing foresight evaluation thinking and practice. In particular, we focus on how foresight thinking and methods can inform evaluation practice (and vice versa), the foresight capacity required on the part of evaluators, and the evaluation capacity that foresight practitioners currently have. Additionally, we provide some observations on gaps and challenges, and recommend ways that evaluators can look inward and outward to advance their foresight evaluation practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
New Directions for Evaluation
New Directions for Evaluation Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信