IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v72y2019icp152-161.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Where do we stand? Recent AEA member views on professionalization

Author

Listed:
  • Donaldson, Scott I.

Abstract

The professionalization of evaluation continues to be debated at numerous conferences in the U.S. and abroad. At this time, AEA member views on the potential benefits and negative side effects of professionalization are essential as the discussion evolves. This study provides recent views on major topics in professionalization, including potential benefits, negative side effects, processes, competencies, and procedures. Results from in-depth interviews and an online survey demonstrate that AEA members view potential benefits of professionalization to be stakeholder trust, evaluator reputation and identity, while concerns about a potential negative side effect known as the “narrowing effect” (i.e., some evaluators will be alienated based on their background, competencies, etc.) were expressed by participants. These recent findings can inform the ongoing discussion of professionalization, and suggest new directions for future research on evaluation.

Suggested Citation

  • Donaldson, Scott I., 2019. "Where do we stand? Recent AEA member views on professionalization," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 152-161.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:72:y:2019:i:c:p:152-161
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.10.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718918301289
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.10.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ayoo, Sandra, 2023. "Perceptions of evaluator professional autonomy in North American evaluation practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:72:y:2019:i:c:p:152-161. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.