Thank you for a very interesting discussion and insights.
Increasing the influence of evidence on decision-making is a long-standing challenge for all of us working on Monitoring or Evaluation functions, which connects to a series of factors at all levels of our Organizations, even when the importance of evidence is well recognized.
In the World Food Programme' evaluation function, we have enforced dedicated strategies to encourage our stakeholders to use evidence as they make decisions. Looking back on a few years of experience, I can share some reflections on what we start seeing to be effective.
I certainly subscribe to many of the points made by colleagues related to impeding factors, such as issues with the quality of their data; the fragmentation of information systems; an organizational culture that still sees monitoring or evaluation as compliance exercises rather than learning opportunities, or on the centrality of senior leadership’s championing role.
Regarding options to better embed evidence into decision, I also concur with the views shared by our colleague Brilliant Nkomo, that formalizing processes is an essential first step.If many organizations do have clearM&E frameworks and develop associated guidance and capacities, it is also important to ensure to somewhat institutionalize the feeding of evidence-based knowledge into any policy or programmatic discussion, by integrating it formally into strategic planning, or regular programme stock take and review processes.
Related to this, our experience has shown that efforts to sync our evidence generation with the needs of our stakeholders do pay off: as generators of evidence and knowledge, we have been more proactive in engaging with those whose decisions we think we can support, to hear what our colleagues are grappling with and understand where they have gaps. In parallel, we developed a capacity to respond to needs as they arise, by repurposing evidence that exists into new products. Since we started developing this capacity, we are seeing that a culture shift slowly operating, whereby evaluation gets to be considered as a knowledge partner.
Last, I would also say that the returns we had from our stakeholders, as we surveyed them on how they value the evidence we provide, has also kept confirming that tailored communication also pays off: we know that various roles will call for various focus and form of evidence preferences. So, the more we adapt to the variety of needs of those we serve, the better our products are received, and likely to be used.
RE: How to Ensure Effective Utilization of Feedback and Recommendations from Evaluation Reports in Decision-Making
Italy
Aurelie Larmoyer
Senior Evaluation officer
WFP
Posted on 22/08/2025
Dear Monica and colleagues,
Thank you for a very interesting discussion and insights.
Increasing the influence of evidence on decision-making is a long-standing challenge for all of us working on Monitoring or Evaluation functions, which connects to a series of factors at all levels of our Organizations, even when the importance of evidence is well recognized.
In the World Food Programme' evaluation function, we have enforced dedicated strategies to encourage our stakeholders to use evidence as they make decisions. Looking back on a few years of experience, I can share some reflections on what we start seeing to be effective.
I certainly subscribe to many of the points made by colleagues related to impeding factors, such as issues with the quality of their data; the fragmentation of information systems; an organizational culture that still sees monitoring or evaluation as compliance exercises rather than learning opportunities, or on the centrality of senior leadership’s championing role.
Regarding options to better embed evidence into decision, I also concur with the views shared by our colleague Brilliant Nkomo, that formalizing processes is an essential first step. If many organizations do have clear M&E frameworks and develop associated guidance and capacities, it is also important to ensure to somewhat institutionalize the feeding of evidence-based knowledge into any policy or programmatic discussion, by integrating it formally into strategic planning, or regular programme stock take and review processes.
Related to this, our experience has shown that efforts to sync our evidence generation with the needs of our stakeholders do pay off: as generators of evidence and knowledge, we have been more proactive in engaging with those whose decisions we think we can support, to hear what our colleagues are grappling with and understand where they have gaps. In parallel, we developed a capacity to respond to needs as they arise, by repurposing evidence that exists into new products. Since we started developing this capacity, we are seeing that a culture shift slowly operating, whereby evaluation gets to be considered as a knowledge partner.
Last, I would also say that the returns we had from our stakeholders, as we surveyed them on how they value the evidence we provide, has also kept confirming that tailored communication also pays off: we know that various roles will call for various focus and form of evidence preferences. So, the more we adapt to the variety of needs of those we serve, the better our products are received, and likely to be used.
Best to all,
Aurelie