When paradigms meet

interacting perspectives on evaluation in the non-profit sector

Cristina Neesham, Leanne McCormick, Michelle Greenwood

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

This study examines a public debate in Australia, arising from a national government report, around how social contribution in the nonprofit sector should be assessed. Guided by several meta-perspectives on evaluation, we identify connections between foundational assumptions and normative positions on evaluation espoused by non-profit organizations (NPOs), and examine the ways in which the inter-paradigmatic context of the non-profit sector contributes to the emergence of NPOs’ different normative positions on evaluation. We conclude that particular paradigmatic orientations of NPOs (positivism, interpretivism, constructivism) lead to particular perspectives on how NPOs should engage with alternative paradigms (monism, impartial pluralism, radical pluralism).
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)192-219
Number of pages28
JournalFinancial Accountability and Management
Volume33
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - May 2017

Keywords

  • evaluation paradigm
  • evaluation theory
  • inter-paradigmatic context
  • nonprofit sector
  • NPO assessment

Cite this

@article{b118e7058bee43e7ad6aceb8b20511bb,
title = "When paradigms meet: interacting perspectives on evaluation in the non-profit sector",
abstract = "This study examines a public debate in Australia, arising from a national government report, around how social contribution in the nonprofit sector should be assessed. Guided by several meta-perspectives on evaluation, we identify connections between foundational assumptions and normative positions on evaluation espoused by non-profit organizations (NPOs), and examine the ways in which the inter-paradigmatic context of the non-profit sector contributes to the emergence of NPOs’ different normative positions on evaluation. We conclude that particular paradigmatic orientations of NPOs (positivism, interpretivism, constructivism) lead to particular perspectives on how NPOs should engage with alternative paradigms (monism, impartial pluralism, radical pluralism).",
keywords = "evaluation paradigm, evaluation theory, inter-paradigmatic context, nonprofit sector, NPO assessment",
author = "Cristina Neesham and Leanne McCormick and Michelle Greenwood",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1111/faam.12121",
language = "English",
volume = "33",
pages = "192--219",
journal = "Financial Accountability and Management",
issn = "0267-4424",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

When paradigms meet : interacting perspectives on evaluation in the non-profit sector. / Neesham, Cristina; McCormick, Leanne; Greenwood, Michelle.

In: Financial Accountability and Management, Vol. 33, No. 2, 05.2017, p. 192-219.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - When paradigms meet

T2 - interacting perspectives on evaluation in the non-profit sector

AU - Neesham, Cristina

AU - McCormick, Leanne

AU - Greenwood, Michelle

PY - 2017/5

Y1 - 2017/5

N2 - This study examines a public debate in Australia, arising from a national government report, around how social contribution in the nonprofit sector should be assessed. Guided by several meta-perspectives on evaluation, we identify connections between foundational assumptions and normative positions on evaluation espoused by non-profit organizations (NPOs), and examine the ways in which the inter-paradigmatic context of the non-profit sector contributes to the emergence of NPOs’ different normative positions on evaluation. We conclude that particular paradigmatic orientations of NPOs (positivism, interpretivism, constructivism) lead to particular perspectives on how NPOs should engage with alternative paradigms (monism, impartial pluralism, radical pluralism).

AB - This study examines a public debate in Australia, arising from a national government report, around how social contribution in the nonprofit sector should be assessed. Guided by several meta-perspectives on evaluation, we identify connections between foundational assumptions and normative positions on evaluation espoused by non-profit organizations (NPOs), and examine the ways in which the inter-paradigmatic context of the non-profit sector contributes to the emergence of NPOs’ different normative positions on evaluation. We conclude that particular paradigmatic orientations of NPOs (positivism, interpretivism, constructivism) lead to particular perspectives on how NPOs should engage with alternative paradigms (monism, impartial pluralism, radical pluralism).

KW - evaluation paradigm

KW - evaluation theory

KW - inter-paradigmatic context

KW - nonprofit sector

KW - NPO assessment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85016746981&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/faam.12121

DO - 10.1111/faam.12121

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 192

EP - 219

JO - Financial Accountability and Management

JF - Financial Accountability and Management

SN - 0267-4424

IS - 2

ER -