Learning Portal

Qualitative approaches: outcome mapping

Outcome mapping is a qualitative tool that emphasises behavioural changes, relationships and activities within a programme needed to achieve social change. It employs a comprehensive framework for monitoring outcomes and embraces unexpected changes to assess a programme’s contributions.

Page contents

multiethnic group of friends on a walk

Basics

In a nutshell

The outcome mapping (OM) approach is a tool for planning, monitoring and evaluating projects or programmes aimed at social change and capacity development. It emphasises changes in behaviour, relationships, actions and activities of individuals, groups or organisations directly involved in a programme. This approach is centred around people and learning during the development process and embraces unexpected changes as potential innovations. OM is aligned with the theory of change approach, offering a framework to gather data on outcomes (current critical changes that lead to longer, more transformative change) initiated by capacity development for agricultural innovation. It enables a credible assessment of an intervention's contribution to results. OM assists a project or programme in understanding its impact on the progression of change among involved partners. Progress towards achieving functional capacity development is measured by progress markers (indicators of change).

Purpose of OM:

  • Aims to identify and influence the behavioural changes of boundary partners (key actors/participants) that contribute to achieving a programme’s vision (the long-term, overall development changes which a programme seeks to support).
  • Promotes reflection and learning among stakeholders, enabling them to adapt strategies and improve a programme's effectiveness.
  • Is well suited for complex, dynamic environments where changes are non-linear and influenced by various factors.

Core components of OM are:

  • Intentional design: This involves defining the vision, identifying boundary partners (the individuals, groups, or organisations with whom the programme interacts directly), setting outcome challenges (the desired changes in behaviour and relationships), and developing progress markers.
  • Outcome and performance monitoring: This includes the continuous monitoring of progress markers, strategy maps and organisational practices to track and adapt strategies that foster expected changes. The following data collection tools are used for this purpose: (1) Strategy journal: A tool for tracking the strategies implemented to foster changes in boundary partners. It records allocated resources, undertaken activities and their outputs, all while suggesting improvements; (2) Performance journal: A tool for monitoring the internal practices of the organisation. It documents the effectiveness of the organisation’s operations and provides insights for adjustments; and (3) Outcome journal: A tool for collecting data on progress markers. It helps assess the level of change achieved and identifies the factors contributing to these changes.
  • Evaluation planning: This involves developing a plan to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of the programme, providing feedback for continuous improvement.

OM has been applied in various projects, such as the Capacity Development for Agricultural Innovation Systems (CDAIS) project, funded by the EU and implemented by Agrinatura and the FAO in collaboration with national partners. This approach helps monitor and assess the progress of capacity development interventions aimed at fostering innovation in agriculture.

Pros and cons

Advantages Disadvantages 
  • Emphasises the behavioural changes needed to achieve long-term development goals, making it particularly effective in capacity development and social change projects.
  • Accepts and adapts to unanticipated changes, promoting innovation and continuous learning.
  • The participatory nature of OM involves stakeholders in the planning, monitoring and evaluation process, enhancing ownership and accountability.
  • Provides a comprehensive framework for monitoring not just outcomes, but also the processes and strategies leading to them.
  • The use of progress markers allows for the tracking of incremental changes, making it easier to monitor and adjust strategies as needed.
  • The methodology can be complex to implement, particularly in large scale projects with multiple boundary partners (actors/participants) and outcome challenges.
  • Stakeholders may initially resist the participatory and iterative nature of OM, especially if they are accustomed to more traditional, linear evaluation approaches.
  • Managing and analysing the data collected through various journals can be challenging, requiring robust data management systems.
  • Implementing OM can be time consuming, requiring significant human and financial resources for continuous monitoring and facilitation.

When to use?

In the context of the CAP Strategic Plan evaluation, OM is useful for assessing programmes that were developed based on the theory of change, with a focus on behavioural changes and capacity development. This approach is effective for monitoring and evaluating complex programmes involving multiple stakeholders and dynamic environments, such as Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS) and Local Development Strategies (LDS/LEADER).

OM can be used to assess the impact of CAP interventions on cross-cutting themes like sustainability, innovation and social inclusion. It tracks behavioural changes and capacity development among stakeholders, making it effective for evaluating interventions aimed at enhancing the skills and knowledge of farmers, cooperatives, agricultural advisors and other stakeholders. For example, OM can assess how an increase in farmers participating in training programmes leads to transformative changes in farming practices.

This approach is suitable for programmes promoting agricultural innovation and sustainability, as it monitors how changes in stakeholder behaviour contribute to sustainable practices and innovative solutions. OM fosters a culture of continuous improvement and innovation by accepting unanticipated changes and encourages stakeholders to reflect on and re-adapt their strategies.

OM is also suitable for monitoring multi-stakeholder initiatives, such as rural development projects involving the private sector, NGOs, community groups and public sector (LEADER). It ensures that all stakeholders work towards common goals and adapt strategies based on continuous feedback. OM facilitates collaborative planning and monitoring, aligning stakeholders towards shared objectives.

In environments where changes are non-linear and influenced by various internal and external factors, OM supports adaptive management and continuous improvement of strategies. Its participatory approach engages stakeholders during the monitoring and evaluation process, enhancing their commitment and ownership of a programme’s outcomes.

Preconditions

The preconditions for applying OM include:

  • Having a well defined vision of the long-term development changes that a programme aims to achieve. A collaborative environment where stakeholders are willing to work together towards common goals is necessary.
  • Active involvement and strong commitment from all stakeholders in the OM process are essential. Continuous monitoring of progress markers, strategies and organisational practices, supported by established feedback mechanisms for adaptive management and improvement, is vital.
  • Readiness to learn from the process and adapt strategies based on the findings. 
  • Skilled evaluators with experience in using OM should be available to guide the process and ensure effective participation. The provision of training and support to stakeholders is crucial for understanding and applying OM concepts and tools. 
  • Adequate time and financial resources must be available to support the iterative and participatory nature of OM. There should be resources for managing and analysing the data collected through various OM tools. 

Step-by-step

The methodology for OM includes three main steps that are further detailed with more specific actions:

Step 1 – Intentional design 

Define the vision, identify boundary partners, set outcome challenges, and develop progress markers.

Define the vision (WHY): Clearly express the long-term development changes which the programme aims to achieve.

Identify boundary partners (WHO): Define the individuals, groups or organisations the programme interacts with directly and hopes to influence. The identification of boundary partners is crucial as it focuses the programme’s efforts on specific groups whose behaviour the programme intends to change.

Set outcome challenges (WHAT): Describe the desired changes in behaviour, relationships, activities or actions of the boundary partners. These are the changes in behaviour, relationships, activities or actions that the programme aims to achieve within its boundary partners. They describe the ideal state that boundary partners should reach to contribute effectively to the programme's vision.

Develop progress markers (HOW): Create specific indicators that describe the progression of changes in boundary partners. They are categorised into three levels: ‘expect-to-see’ (immediate responses), ‘like-to-see’ (intermediate changes), and ‘love-to-see’ (long-term outcomes). Progress markers are dynamic and can be adjusted as the programme evolves.

Complete a strategy map for each outcome challenge (HOW): After clarifying the changes the programme intends to influence, select activities that maximise the likelihood of success.

Articulate organizational practices (HOW): Organisational practices reveal an organisation’s potential to perform well. Focusing on data concerning organisational practices allows one to reflect on internal processes and potential unintended results. 

Step 2 – Outcome and performance monitoring

Monitoring priorities provides a process for establishing the areas of the project that are to be monitored. The following data collection tools are used for this purpose:

  • Strategy Journal: Track implemented strategies to foster changes in boundary partners. Record allocated resources, undertaken activities and their outputs.
  • Performance Journal: Monitor the internal practices of the organisation, documenting the effectiveness of operations and providing insights for adjustments.
  • Outcome Journal: Collect data on progress markers, assessing the level of change achieved and identifying contributing factors.

Step 3 – Evaluation planning

Develop an evaluation plan to systematically assess the programme’s impact and provide feedback for continuous improvement. Outline the key elements of the evaluation process, including who will use the evaluation, how and when it will be conducted, information sources, methods, costs, and timing.

Additional steps to close the cycle of planning, monitoring and evaluating can include the following actions:

Refining the strategy

  • Engage stakeholders in reflection and learning processes to adapt strategies based on feedback.
  • Use insights from monitoring and evaluation to make necessary adjustments to the programme’s strategies and activities.

Reporting and communication

  • Share the results of the evaluation with stakeholders, highlighting the behavioural changes and progress achieved.
  • Establish a feedback loop to ensure continuous improvement and adaptation based on evaluation findings.

Main takeaway points

  • OM emphasises the behavioural changes needed to achieve long-term development goals.
  • OM is adaptable to unanticipated changes, promoting innovation and continuous learning.
  • The participatory nature of OM enhances ownership and accountability among stakeholders.
  • OM provides a comprehensive framework for monitoring outcomes and the processes leading to those outcomes.
  • The use of progress markers allows for tracking incremental changes and adjusting strategies as needed.
  • Implementing OM requires significant time and resources for continuous monitoring and facilitation.
  • The methodology can be complex and subjective, requiring robust data management and facilitation skills.

Learning from experience

Further reading