Thank you for initiating this insightful and important discussion.
Based on my experience, the answer to these questions is far from straightforward. As an evaluator, I have observed that the success of a project is heavily dependent on the context in which it is implemented. It is not uncommon for smaller projects to yield significant impact, while larger ones may fall short. Often, the determining factors are not merely the volume of funding but rather the skillset of the implementing teams and the enabling environment surrounding the project.
For example, I once analyzed a portfolio comprising both large-scale (multi-million euro) and small-scale (approximately 50,000 euro) projects. Interestingly, the smaller projects were typically focused on delivering market-scalable solutions and demonstrated a strong capacity to generate tangible results and compelling data, which in turn facilitated scaling. Conversely, the larger projects, often implemented through multi-stakeholder platforms, tended to prioritize coordination and harmonization efforts. These processes consumed substantial resources in decision-making and administrative overheads, and as a result, their actual outcomes were often diluted or obscured by multiple narratives and the diverse interests of various partners. In another case, I observed that relatively modest investments in infrastructure (around 20,000 euros) were sufficient to create tangible and visible benefits within local communities, gaining their strong applause. At the same time, larger projects leveraging extensive networks were able to amplify their impact by enhancing dissemination efforts across multiple channels.
Regarding Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems, I believe a key area for improvement lies in strengthening the self-evaluation capacities and fostering a data-informed culture within project implementation teams. While some have dedicated M&E personnel, others do not, and evaluators are often brought in only when required to produce progress assessment reports. Ideally, continuous support from a MEL officer or some form of coaching should be provided from the project inception phase. In-depth studies of local needs and challenges for the project legitimacy are also the key. Furthermore, there could be more space created for collaborative learning and knowledge exchange among projects funded under similar thematic areas or regions.
RE: Do Big Projects Deliver Effective Solutions in a Complex World?
Poland
Anna Maria Augustyn
International consultant
Posted on 22/04/2025
Dear Ram,
Thank you for initiating this insightful and important discussion.
Based on my experience, the answer to these questions is far from straightforward. As an evaluator, I have observed that the success of a project is heavily dependent on the context in which it is implemented. It is not uncommon for smaller projects to yield significant impact, while larger ones may fall short. Often, the determining factors are not merely the volume of funding but rather the skillset of the implementing teams and the enabling environment surrounding the project.
For example, I once analyzed a portfolio comprising both large-scale (multi-million euro) and small-scale (approximately 50,000 euro) projects. Interestingly, the smaller projects were typically focused on delivering market-scalable solutions and demonstrated a strong capacity to generate tangible results and compelling data, which in turn facilitated scaling. Conversely, the larger projects, often implemented through multi-stakeholder platforms, tended to prioritize coordination and harmonization efforts. These processes consumed substantial resources in decision-making and administrative overheads, and as a result, their actual outcomes were often diluted or obscured by multiple narratives and the diverse interests of various partners. In another case, I observed that relatively modest investments in infrastructure (around 20,000 euros) were sufficient to create tangible and visible benefits within local communities, gaining their strong applause. At the same time, larger projects leveraging extensive networks were able to amplify their impact by enhancing dissemination efforts across multiple channels.
Regarding Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) systems, I believe a key area for improvement lies in strengthening the self-evaluation capacities and fostering a data-informed culture within project implementation teams. While some have dedicated M&E personnel, others do not, and evaluators are often brought in only when required to produce progress assessment reports. Ideally, continuous support from a MEL officer or some form of coaching should be provided from the project inception phase. In-depth studies of local needs and challenges for the project legitimacy are also the key. Furthermore, there could be more space created for collaborative learning and knowledge exchange among projects funded under similar thematic areas or regions.
Best wishes,
Anna Maria Augustyn