Understanding Evaluation in Development: Insights from an Expert

For young monitoring and evaluation professionals eager to understand how evidence can truly shape development outcomes, today’s feature offers a rare opportunity. We speak with an experienced international consultant whose career spans more than two decades across ITC, FAO, IPD, and multiple regions from Central Asia to the Caribbean. With a background in trade development, value chain analysis, and evaluation design, he shares practical, grounded insights on what it really takes to lead complex evaluations, manage diverse teams, and ensure that evidence is not only collected but actually used. His reflections provide an accessible and motivating guide for early-career evaluators who want to build solid habits of rigor, learning, and integrity in their work.

Developing and Managing Evaluation Policies

Q: Describe your experience with developing and managing evaluation policies?

JB: I have developed and managed evaluation frameworks and policies across several international trade and development programs. As Lead Author of the ITC-style Export Trade Strategy Training Series (2024–present), I designed and implemented evaluation procedures linking project objectives, performance indicators, and feedback loops for national export strategies in Uzbekistan, Iraq, and Trinidad & Tobago. Working with ITC, FAO, and IPD (BMZ), I aligned these evaluations with OECD-DAC criteria and UN results-based management principles, ensuring consistency, transparency, and learning. I also established policy guidance for monitoring SME competitiveness, integrating gender and sustainability metrics. These experiences strengthened my ability to connect evaluation policy with institutional priorities, accountability, and adaptive decision-making.

Overcoming Evaluation Challenges

Q: Can you give an example of a challenging evaluation and how you overcame the challenges?

JB: One of the most challenging evaluations I led was during the SAAVI project in Iraq, where I assessed the export readiness and value chain performance of date producers. The main difficulties were fragmented data, limited institutional coordination, and security-related access constraints, which made on-site verification and stakeholder interviews difficult.

To overcome these challenges, I designed a hybrid evaluation approach: remote data collection supported by structured digital surveys, complemented with targeted, verified field inputs from local partners. I triangulated production, quality, and export-performance data with market intelligence and previous TRTA benchmarks to ensure validity. I also facilitated joint review sessions with BSOs and ministries to align findings and validate assumptions. This approach produced a credible, evidence-based evaluation despite contextual limitations, and the findings were later integrated into the national export strategy and capacity-building plans.

Fostering Accountability and Learning

Q: How do you promote a culture of accountability and learning in your team?

JB: I promote a culture of accountability and learning by creating an environment where evidence, transparency, and reflection guide our work. In my assignments with ITC, FAO, and IPD, I always established clear roles, shared objectives, and measurable indicators at the outset, so every team member understood how their contribution affected overall results.

I introduce regular learning checkpoints, where we review data, discuss challenges openly, and document lessons learned. These sessions are not audits but spaces for constructive reflection, allowing the team to adjust methods and improve quality continuously. I also encourage junior colleagues to take ownership of analytical components, and I pair them with more experienced experts to build confidence and skills.

Accountability is strengthened through consistent, evidence-based reporting, while learning is supported by openly sharing insights, creating short guidance notes, and building reusable tools. This combination helps teams internalize evaluation standards and see learning as a core part of high-quality delivery.

Evaluating Success in Evaluation Processes

Q: What criteria do you use to evaluate the success of evaluation processes?

JB: I assess the success of an evaluation process using four main criteria aligned with UNEG and OECD-DAC standards:

1. Methodological rigor and credibility. The evaluation must apply a sound methodology, use reliable data, and integrate triangulation. Success means findings can be defended and trusted by senior management and external partners.

   
   

2. Stakeholder engagement and ownership. An evaluation is successful when key stakeholders—ministries, BSOs, SMEs, donors—are actively consulted, validate the evidence, and feel represented in the analysis. Strong engagement increases the practical relevance of recommendations.

   
   

3. Usefulness and uptake of recommendations. The true measure of success is whether recommendations are actionable and integrated into decision-making. In my ITC and IPD assignments, I tracked how evaluation findings informed export strategies and training reforms.

   
   

4. Contribution to learning and continuous improvement. A successful evaluation strengthens institutional knowledge: it captures lessons learned, highlights good practices, and builds capacity for future programming. An evaluation is complete only when it produces credible evidence, drives decisions, and enhances organizational learning.

   
   

Ensuring Stakeholder Engagement

Q: Describe how you ensure stakeholder engagement throughout the evaluation process.

JB: I ensure strong stakeholder engagement by integrating communication and participation into every stage of the evaluation cycle. At the outset, I map all relevant actors - ministries, BSOs, SMEs, producer groups, donors - and clarify their roles, expectations, and information needs. I then conduct early consultations to align the evaluation scope, indicators, and key questions with their priorities.

During data collection, I use multi-channel engagement: structured interviews, focus groups, validation workshops, and remote surveys when access is limited. This approach proved effective in projects such as Uzbekistan dried fruits and SAAVI Iraq, where on-the-ground realities required flexible coordination with local partners.

Throughout implementation, I maintain transparent communication, sharing interim findings and inviting feedback to validate assumptions and strengthen accuracy. At the final stage, I organize feedback and validation sessions to discuss conclusions, refine recommendations, and build ownership for follow-up actions. This consistent and inclusive approach not only improves data quality but also ensures that stakeholders feel represented and committed to using the evaluation results.

The Role of Data Analytics in Evaluation

Q: Can you discuss your experience with data analytics in evaluation?

JB: I use data analytics as a core element of evaluation, combining quantitative indicators with qualitative insights. In my work with ITC, FAO, and IPD (BMZ), I regularly analyze export performance, value chain efficiency, price dynamics, and SME readiness using structured datasets. For example, in the Uzbekistan dried fruits and SAAVI Iraq evaluations, I built indicator matrices to compare quality compliance, processing capacity, and market potential across producer groups, enabling evidence-based recommendations.

I am also completing the IBM Data Analyst Professional Certificate, which strengthened my skills in Excel analytics, SQL, Python, data cleaning, statistical analysis, and visualization. These tools allow me to validate data reliability, run comparative analyses, identify patterns, and present findings clearly to decision-makers.

Across projects, I integrate data analytics into every evaluation stage: defining indicators, collecting and cleaning data, triangulating sources, and transforming results into dashboards, briefs, or synthesis notes. This ensures that conclusions are transparent, evidence-driven, and aligned with UNEG and OECD-DAC standards.

Handling Feedback and Criticism

Q: How do you handle feedback and criticism regarding evaluation reports?

JB: I approach feedback and criticism as an essential part of producing credible and useful evaluation reports. My first step is to listen carefully and separate substantive issues from stylistic preferences, ensuring I fully understand the concern. I then revisit the evidence, verify the data, and check whether the feedback reveals gaps in clarity, methodology, or stakeholder perspective.

When feedback highlights a legitimate issue, I address it transparently by strengthening the analysis, refining the wording, or adding clarifications. When comments stem from differing viewpoints, I engage in constructive dialogue to explain the methodological basis and the evidence supporting the findings, while remaining open to adjustments that improve accuracy and usability.

Throughout my work with ITC, FAO, and IPD, I found that involving stakeholders early and sharing interim findings reduces resistance at the final stage. My goal is always to ensure that the final report is rigorous, balanced, and actionable, and that all parties feel the evaluation process was fair, respectful, and grounded in evidence.

Strategies for Effective Dissemination

Q: What strategies do you use to disseminate evaluation findings effectively?

JB: I use a multi-channel, audience-specific approach to ensure evaluation findings are accessible, understood, and used. First, I translate technical results into concise, user-friendly products such as briefs, summary notes, infographics, and dashboards. This allows senior management, ministries, and BSOs to quickly grasp key insights and recommendations.

Second, I organize validation and dissemination workshops with stakeholders, where findings are presented interactively, and participants can discuss implications for policy and programming. This approach worked well in my TRTA assignments in Uzbekistan, Iraq, and Trinidad & Tobago, where joint discussions increased ownership and uptake of recommendations.

Third, I tailor communication formats to each audience: detailed reports for technical teams, short evidence summaries for policymakers, and visual materials for wider institutional learning. When appropriate, I integrate findings into training materials and knowledge platforms, ensuring lessons learned support future capacity-building.

Finally, I maintain open communication channels after dissemination, supporting teams in applying recommendations and monitoring follow-up actions. This ensures that evaluation results translate into practical improvements and strategic decisions.

Conclusion: The Craft of Evaluation

As our conversation draws to a close, one message becomes unmistakably clear: evaluation is not just a technical function but a disciplined commitment to learning, transparency, and service. Whether working in fragile contexts, designing national strategies, or supporting small enterprises on the ground, the goal remains the same: to generate evidence that helps people make better decisions. For young practitioners stepping into the field, this perspective is a reminder that evaluation is both a craft and a responsibility, a continuous process of questioning, listening, and improving. And in a world that increasingly depends on measurable, accountable development, these skills are more relevant than ever.