External Evaluation

An external evaluation is conducted by an evaluator who is not employed by the organization that has commissioned the evaluation. An external perspective brings credibility to the process because it is perceived as more objective and accountable than an evaluation conducted by internal staff. It may also foster innovative thinking.

The external evaluator or team is governed by the terms of a contract that specifies the evaluation tasks and the duration of the project. The contract focuses the evaluator on the parameters of the evaluation process itself and limits involvement in broader organizational issues. It can be easily (though not necessarily painlessly) severed by both parties and so the relationship is both temporary and accountable. Its arm’s length nature allows the external evaluator to interact objectively with staff and stakeholders without fear of reprisal and report findings (both negative and positive) without affecting their own career aspirations. The external evaluator appears to have [Page 654]less to gain or lose from the evaluation findings and is less vulnerable to conflict of interest.

On the other hand, internal evaluators have a personal stake in the success of the organization. They have a clear advantage in terms of their understanding of organizational history, culture, context, and the players involved but can be hampered by the implications of reporting negative findings to their employer. In larger organizations, being a union member or located in a particular department can limit the likelihood of staff interacting openly with them.

The compensation arrangements made for an external evaluation tend to heighten accountability and enhance the drive for completion. While the internal evaluator receives a salary regardless of the stage of the evaluation project, the external evaluator must adhere to completion timelines to get paid. Transparency is also increased by contractual requirements for interim documentation as status or technical reports tied to milestone payments.

While an internal evaluator understands the politics of the program under review, an external evaluator has worked with many other programs and communities and brings a broader perspective. This cross fertilization can result in fresher, more innovative approaches to the evaluation problem. Through a series of engagements in different settings, external evaluators have learned many ways to interact with stakeholders, collect data, and present findings. Thus, they are better able to respond to the unexpected as the evaluation unfolds.

Selecting an internal or external evaluator may be situational and sometimes budget driven, because internal evaluators are available at no additional cost. In complex organizations such as the federal government, a joint internal–external team may be the best solution combining a credible and objective external perspective with the internal knowledge required to shepherd the study through to completion.

See also Ethical Issues in Evaluation; Internal Evaluation; Objectivity