Your cart is currently empty!
SayPro Types of Methods
Annex D provides a description of 34 different methods commonly used for M&E and, in particular, participatory M&E. They have been grouped as follows:
- sampling methods;
- core M&E methods (such as stakeholder analysis and questionnaires);
- discussion methods for groups (such as brainstorming and role plays);
- methods for spatially-distributed information (such as maps and transects);
- methods for time-based patterns of change (such as diaries and photographs);
- methods for analysing relationships and linkages (such as impact flow diagrams and problem trees);
- methods for ranking and prioritising (such as matrices).
You will probably also need to draw on other specialised methods related to specific technical fields, which are clustered under biophysical measurements (Method 5) and cost-benefit analysis (Method 7) in Annex D.By calling on specific technical expertise when developing a detailed M&E plan, you can ensure the inclusion of appropriate specialist methods. Before selecting your methods, first consider three important aspects:
- quantitative versus qualitative methods;
- individual versus group-based methods;
- the extent to which a method can be participatory.
Table 6-2. Examples of multi-purpose M&E methods
Qualitative Data | Quantitative Data | |
Methods for groups | Case studies, brainstorming, focus groups, SWOT, drama and role plays, maps, transects, GIS, historical trends/ timelines, seasonal calendars, rich pictures, visioning, flow diagrams, well-being ranking | Nominal group technique, maps, transects, historical trends/timelines, seasonal calendars, flow diagrams, matrix scoring and ranking |
Methods for individuals | Semi-structured interviews, case studies, maps, transects, diaries, historical trends/timelines, seasonal calendars, flow diagrams | Direct measurements, structured questionnaires, maps, transects, GIS, diaries, flow diagrams |
Quantitative and Qualitative MethodsQuantitative methods directly measure the status or change of a specific variable, for example, changes in crop yield, kilometres of road built or hours women spend fetching water. Quantitative methods provide direct numerical results.Qualitative methods gather information by asking people to explain what they have observed, do, believe or feel. The output from qualitative methods is textual descriptions.Much information in M&E reports tends to be based on numbers. Quantitative data are clear and precise and are often considered to be more scientifically verifiable. You will always need this kind of information. However, for some performance questions you will need to complement it by asking people about their experiences and opinions.Choosing to use a method to produce or analyse qualitative or quantitative data (see Box 6-4) depends not only on the type of information you are seeking but also on the capacities and resources you have available, how the information will be used and how precise data need to be.Note that the difference between quantitative and qualitative methods is not absolute. Much qualitative information can be quantified. For example, opinions can be clustered into groups and then counted, thereby becoming quantitative. Note, however, that you can never make quantitative information more qualitative. You cannot extract an opinion from a number.
Box 6-4. Using methods to produce quantitative or qualitative dataMethods for quantitative data. They need to produce data that are easily represented as numbers, answering questions such as "How much…?", "How many…?", and "How frequent …?" Quantitative data generally require formal measurements of variables such as income, production or population densities.Methods for qualitative data. They produce data that are not easily summarised in numerical form, broadly answering the "how" and "why" through, for instance, meetings, interviews or general observations. Qualitative data are more appropriate for understanding people’s attitudes or behaviours, beliefs, opinions, experiences and priorities. Qualitative data include answers to questions like "Why do you think this happened?" and "How do you think this will affect you?" |
Box 6-5. Considering the pros and cons of qualitative and quantitative studies 2A study focusing on the community’s acceptability of immunisation was carried out in Somalia, as mothers did not seem to want to take their children to be immunised.A quantitative survey could have found out: how many mothers accept immunisation, how many do not and whether this is related statistically to their socio-economic status, education, age, number of children, distance from the clinic, income, clan, etc. This information might be useful for programme planning if the social or physical factors that were found to influence the mothers could be changed.However, a qualitative survey was used instead. It found out why mothers do or do not take their children to be immunised. It looked at their experience with immunisation and how that affects their behaviour. The study showed that the way mothers were treated in clinics put them off. For example, they were not given enough information and were scared when their children suffered from fevers after vaccination. They also thought that diseases were caused by bad spirits and, therefore, could not be prevented by vaccination.From this study, it was possible to change the way clinics were run and how staff was trained, and it was easier to explain to mothers why immunisation is important. |
Considering Individual- or Group-Based MethodsThroughout the M&E process – from design, to data collection and analysis – you can choose to use methods to consult with groups or with individuals. Working with individuals can give you more detailed information but it will only give an overview after analysing data from a set of individuals. A group-based method will elicit a more collective perspective – with areas of consensus and divergence – while personal details and perspectives are less likely to emerge. Groups ask more of the facilitator and the quality of discussions depends on the size of the group and how comfortable people are with each other and the topic at hand. Annex D includes one cluster of methods that are particularly suited for group discussions. However, many other methods in Annex D can also be used in a group context.The more people involved at any one M&E event, the greater the importance of good facilitation and planning. The facilitator’s skill will largely determine whether a method is used successfully in a group. Good facilitators will provide suggestions, probe, encourage, redirect and also take notes. They also help manage conflicts by encouraging people to listen to and understand each other’s perspectives.Table 6-3. Pros and cons of working with individuals and groups
Advantages | Disadvantages | |
Processes with individuals | – Manage the discussion more easily- Can get detailed information- Generate data that can usually be structured in a way that makes statistical analysis possible | – Consume more time if you want data from many individuals- Cannot be used to generate consensus- Do not allow cost-effective feedback |
Processes with a group | – Generate new learning in some participants, as information may be shared that normally is not- With careful planning, can allow for marginal voices to be heard- Can show where divergence and convergence of opinions lie | – Can cause problems in terms of data validity, as individuals may be influenced by group dynamics or composition- Cannot (usually) deal with sensitive information- Require a facilitator able to deal with group dynamics- Require careful thought about group composition to adequately represent the voices you want to hear |
What Makes a Method ParticipatoryMany projects are keen to involve primary stakeholders more in M&E. They commonly consider that collecting data from local people using so-called participatory methods is sufficient. Imagine the following scenario. The M&E staff of a project goes to a group of farms to understand if soil nutrient flows have changed as a result of farmer training on soil conservation. They meet the farmers and ask them to sketch maps showing where nutrients enter the farms, how they are used and how they leave, and in particular showing what has changed after soil conservation measures were adopted. The mapping process lasts about two hours, after which the team goes back to the M&E office with the sketched maps to synthesise and analyse the data for a report to the director. At some point, the report is copied and sent to the village. Can you call this mapping process participatory?Participation in M&E is often limited to working with primary stakeholders as information sources, rather than as joint users of information and therefore potential analysts and co-designers of methods. If you have selected the method and use it to get information from people, then you are involved not in a participatory process but in an extractive one. This is fine – unless you are aiming for participatory M&E. In which case, you would involve other stakeholders in choosing and using methods.Many people think there is a set of so-called "participatory" M&E methods, but this is not the case. A method is not inherently participatory or not participatory. Many of the methods useful for M&E can be used in either a participatory or non-participatory way. The participatory impact comes with the way a method is used and who helped select it. The use of a technical method for testing water quality, for example, can become participatory if the community is involved in deciding what aspects of water quality to measure, collecting the data and reviewing the results. On the other hand, if a group is directed to produce a map of the area, there is little discussion, and the map disappears into the project office forever, then this cannot be called participatory mapping. See 2.6 for general considerations for participatory M&E.To ensure that the selection and use of methods is participatory, consider these questions.
- In what aspect of the M&E methods is participation important? In selection or design of the method, in applying it for data collection or for analysis?
- Who should ideally be involved in the task at hand? Who needs to help select, design or use the method? Ideally, those who are to use it for collecting or analysis should be involved in selection/design. This can include staff of implementing partners, project staff, primary stakeholders and consultants.
- Who wants to be involved in what? Not everyone has the time or inclination to participate. This is not a problem, as full participation is neither practical nor possible. Instead, you need to ask those you would like to involve if they are able and interested.
- What is needed for effective participation? Self-confidence is needed before effective participation is possible. Therefore you need to create the conditions for people to feel free in helping define methods, in testing and adjusting them, in collecting data, etc. This can include providing training or follow-up mentoring, finding the right time and place, offering childcare support, etc.
Please visit our website at www.saypro.online Email: info@saypro.online Email: info@saypro.online Call: + 27 11 071 1903 WhatsApp: + 27 84 313 7407. Comment below for any questions and feedback. For SayPro Courses, SayPro Jobs, SayPro Community Development, SayPro Products, SayPro Services, SayPro Consulting, and SayPro Advisory visit our website to www.saypro.online
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.