Measuring while you manage

The paper argues that traditional project evaluation fails to capture the unique value of knowledge networks, which lies in relationships and collective influence rather than just individual deliverables. To address this, the author develops a three-part framework consisting of a planning process, quarterly progress journals for monitoring, and annual and final evaluations. This approach integrates elements from Outcome Mapping, Results Based Management, Logical Framework Analysis, and Human Resource performance evaluations. The framework distinguishes between 'network effectiveness' (doing the right thing) and 'network efficiency' (doing things right), using the Climate Change Knowledge Network as a practical example to demonstrate how to track behavioral changes in both network members and external stakeholders.

• Traditional evaluation methodologies often fail knowledge networks because lead institutions treat the network as a single project, focusing on "specific project deliverables, rather than at the value of the relationships that have emerged from working collaboratively."
• The 'network advantage' is defined by three core strengths: the creation of new knowledge through joint value creation, the strengthening of research and communications capacity for all members, and the implementation of strategies to engage decision makers more directly to move knowledge into policy and practice.
• The proposed evaluation framework splits assessment into two categories: Network Effectiveness ("doing the right thing"), which focuses on leveraging change in policies and practices, and Network Efficiency ("doing things right"), which monitors internal operations and transactional costs.
• The author integrates Outcome Mapping's premise that evaluation should focus on "identifying outcomes as changes in behaviours, actions, and relationships" among both network members and external stakeholders.
• The experimental framework utilizes a specific sequence: a Planning Framework to record work plans and indicators, Quarterly Progress Journals for data gathering without subjective grading, and Annual Evaluations that introduce a "level of success" grading system (1-3) to allow for adjustments to objectives.
• In the case of the Climate Change Knowledge Network (CCKN), the framework helped identify that while joint value creation worked well at the project level (e.g., the negotiators' handbook), it was less evident across the network as a whole because members were not sufficiently sharing their individual research on the network website.

APA

Creech, H. (2001). Measuring while you manage. International Institute for Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/networks_evaluation.pdf

Chicago

Creech, Heather. Measuring while you manage. International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2001. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/networks_evaluation.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Creech |first1=Heather |title=Measuring while you manage |publisher=International Institute for Sustainable Development |date=November 2001 |url=https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/networks_evaluation.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{creech2001measuring, author = {Creech, Heather}, title = {{Measuring while you manage}}, institution = {International Institute for Sustainable Development}, year = {2001}, month = nov, url = {https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/networks_evaluation.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }