Empowerment evaluation is a participatory approach to evaluation that aims to empower stakeholders by involving them in the evaluation process and building their capacity to assess and improve their own programs, policies, and initiatives. Developed by David Fetterman, empowerment evaluation emphasizes collaboration, inclusivity, and self-determination, allowing stakeholders to take ownership of the evaluation process and outcomes.
The purpose of empowerment evaluation is to enhance stakeholders’ ability to assess, reflect on, and improve their programs, policies, and initiatives through participatory and capacity-building evaluation processes. The scope of empowerment evaluation encompasses a wide range of contexts, including nonprofit organizations, government agencies, community development projects, and social change initiatives.
Principal Concepts
Participatory Approach: Empowerment evaluation emphasizes the active involvement of stakeholders, including program staff, beneficiaries, funders, and community members, in all stages of the evaluation process, from planning and data collection to analysis and decision-making.
Capacity Building: Empowerment evaluation seeks to build stakeholders’ capacity to conduct evaluations by providing training, coaching, and mentoring in evaluation methods, tools, and techniques, as well as in critical thinking, data analysis, and interpretation.
Self-Determination: Empowerment evaluation promotes self-determination and autonomy among stakeholders, allowing them to define evaluation questions, criteria, and indicators, and to make informed decisions based on evaluation findings.
Theoretical Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation
Empowerment evaluation draws on principles from various theoretical perspectives, including:
Participatory Action Research: Empowerment evaluation shares similarities with participatory action research, which emphasizes collaboration, reflexivity, and social change through collective inquiry and action.
Empowerment Theory: Empowerment evaluation is rooted in empowerment theory, which posits that individuals and communities can enhance their control over their lives and environments through education, participation, and collective action.
Methods and Techniques for Empowerment Evaluation
Empowerment evaluation projects employ a variety of methods and techniques:
Participatory Planning: Involving stakeholders in the planning and design of the evaluation process, including setting goals, defining evaluation questions, and selecting methods and tools.
Capacity-Building Workshops: Conducting capacity-building workshops, training sessions, and skill-building activities to enhance stakeholders’ knowledge, skills, and confidence in conducting evaluations.
Applications of Empowerment Evaluation
Empowerment evaluation has diverse applications across sectors and domains, including:
Nonprofit Organizations: Empowerment evaluation is used in nonprofit organizations to assess the effectiveness of programs and services, engage stakeholders in program improvement efforts, and enhance organizational learning and capacity.
Government Agencies: Empowerment evaluation is applied in government agencies to evaluate public policies, initiatives, and programs, involve citizens and stakeholders in decision-making processes, and promote transparency and accountability in government actions.
Industries Influenced by Empowerment Evaluation
Empowerment evaluation has influenced a wide range of industries and sectors, including:
Healthcare: Empowerment evaluation is used in healthcare settings to evaluate patient-centered care initiatives, engage patients and families in quality improvement efforts, and enhance patient satisfaction and outcomes.
Education: Empowerment evaluation is applied in educational settings to assess the effectiveness of teaching and learning programs, involve students and educators in curriculum development and assessment, and promote student engagement and success.
Advantages of Empowerment Evaluation
Ownership and Engagement: Empowerment evaluation fosters ownership and engagement among stakeholders by involving them in all stages of the evaluation process, from planning and data collection to analysis and decision-making.
Capacity Building: Empowerment evaluation builds stakeholders’ capacity to conduct evaluations and make evidence-based decisions, enhancing their skills, knowledge, and confidence in evaluation methods and techniques.
Challenges and Considerations in Empowerment Evaluation
Despite its benefits, empowerment evaluation presents challenges:
Time and Resources: Empowerment evaluation requires time, resources, and commitment from stakeholders to engage in the evaluation process and implement evaluation findings, which may pose challenges in terms of funding, staffing, and sustainability.
Power Dynamics: Empowerment evaluation may encounter power dynamics and resistance among stakeholders, particularly those with vested interests in maintaining the status quo or controlling the evaluation process and outcomes.
Integration with Broader Organizational and Community Development Strategies
To maximize the benefits of empowerment evaluation, it should be integrated with broader organizational and community development strategies:
Organizational Learning: Integrating empowerment evaluation with organizational learning initiatives to promote a culture of inquiry, reflection, and continuous improvement within organizations and communities.
Community Empowerment: Incorporating empowerment evaluation into community empowerment efforts to engage residents, grassroots organizations, and community leaders in assessing needs, setting priorities, and mobilizing resources for collective action.
Future Directions in Empowerment Evaluation
As empowerment evaluation continues to evolve, future trends may include:
Technology and Innovation: Harnessing technology and innovation to enhance the accessibility, scalability, and sustainability of empowerment evaluation approaches, such as online platforms, mobile applications, and virtual collaboration tools.
Intersectionality and Equity: Advancing intersectionality and equity principles in empowerment evaluation to address intersecting forms of oppression and discrimination, and to ensure that marginalized and underrepresented groups have a voice and agency in shaping evaluation processes and outcomes.
Conclusion
Empowerment evaluation is a participatory approach to evaluation that aims to empower stakeholders by involving them in the evaluation process and building their capacity to assess and improve their own programs, policies, and initiatives. By fostering collaboration, inclusivity, and self-determination, empowerment evaluation enables stakeholders to strengthen their programs, enhance accountability, and achieve meaningful and sustainable results. While empowerment evaluation presents challenges and considerations, it also offers significant advantages in terms of ownership, engagement, and capacity building, making it a valuable and transformative approach to evaluation in today’s complex and dynamic environments.
In a functional organizational structure, groups and teams are organized based on function. Therefore, this organization follows a top-down structure, where most decision flows from top management to bottom. Thus, the bottom of the organization mostly follows the strategy detailed by the top of the organization.
In a flat organizational structure, there is little to no middle management between employees and executives. Therefore it reduces the space between employees and executives to enable an effective communication flow within the organization, thus being faster and leaner.
Project portfolio management (PPM) is a systematic approach to selecting and managing a collection of projects aligned with organizational objectives. That is a business process of managing multiple projects which can be identified, prioritized, and managed within the organization. PPM helps organizations optimize their investments by allocating resources efficiently across all initiatives.
Harvard Business School professor Dr. John Kotter has been a thought-leader on organizational change, and he developed Kotter’s 8-step change model, which helps business managers deal with organizational change. Kotter created the 8-step model to drive organizational transformation.
The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model was created by David Nadler and Michael Tushman at Columbia University. The Nadler-Tushman Congruence Model is a diagnostic tool that identifies problem areas within a company. In the context of business, congruence occurs when the goals of different people or interest groups coincide.
McKinsey’s Seven Degrees of Freedom for Growth is a strategy tool. Developed by partners at McKinsey and Company, the tool helps businesses understand which opportunities will contribute to expansion, and therefore it helps to prioritize those initiatives.
Mintzberg’s 5Ps of Strategy is a strategy development model that examines five different perspectives (plan, ploy, pattern, position, perspective) to develop a successful business strategy. A sixth perspective has been developed over the years, called Practice, which was created to help businesses execute their strategies.
The COSO framework is a means of designing, implementing, and evaluating control within an organization. The COSO framework’s five components are control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring activities. As a fraud risk management tool, businesses can design, implement, and evaluate internal control procedures.
The TOWS Matrix is an acronym for Threats, Opportunities, Weaknesses, and Strengths. The matrix is a variation on the SWOT Analysis, and it seeks to address criticisms of the SWOT Analysis regarding its inability to show relationships between the various categories.
Lewin’s change management model helps businesses manage the uncertainty and resistance associated with change. Kurt Lewin, one of the first academics to focus his research on group dynamics, developed a three-stage model. He proposed that the behavior of individuals happened as a function of group behavior.
OpenAI is an artificial intelligence research laboratory that transitioned into a for-profit organization in 2019. The corporate structure is organized around two entities: OpenAI, Inc., which is a single-member Delaware LLC controlled by OpenAI non-profit, And OpenAI LP, which is a capped, for-profit organization. The OpenAI LP is governed by the board of OpenAI, Inc (the foundation), which acts as a General Partner. At the same time, Limited Partners comprise employees of the LP, some of the board members, and other investors like Reid Hoffman’s charitable foundation, Khosla Ventures, and Microsoft, the leading investor in the LP.
Airbnb follows a holacracy model, or a sort of flat organizational structure, where teams are organized for projects, to move quickly and iterate fast, thus keeping a lean and flexible approach. Airbnb also moved to a hybrid model where employees can work from anywhere and meet on a quarterly basis to plan ahead, and connect to each other.
The Amazon organizational structure is predominantly hierarchical with elements of function-based structure and geographic divisions. While Amazon started as a lean, flat organization in its early years, it transitioned into a hierarchical organization with its jobs and functions clearly defined as it scaled.
The Coca-Cola Company has a somewhat complex matrix organizational structure with geographic divisions, product divisions, business-type units, and functional groups.
Costco has a matrix organizational structure, which can simply be defined as any structure that combines two or more different types. In this case, a predominant functional structure exists with a more secondary divisional structure.
Costco’s geographic divisions reflect its strong presence in the United States combined with its expanding global presence. There are six divisions in the country alone to reflect its standing as the source of most company revenue.
Compared to competitor Walmart, for example, Costco takes more a decentralized approach to management, decision-making, and autonomy. This allows the company’s stores and divisions to more flexibly respond to local market conditions.
Dell has a functional organizational structure with some degree of decentralization. This means functional departments share information, contribute ideas to the success of the organization and have some degree of decision-making power.
eBay was until recently a multi-divisional (M-form) organization with semi-autonomous units grouped according to the services they provided. Today, eBay has a single division called Marketplace, which includes eBay and its international iterations.
Facebook is characterized by a multi-faceted matrix organizational structure. The company utilizes a flat organizational structure in combination with corporate function-based teams and product-based or geographic divisions. The flat organization structure is organized around the leadership of Mark Zuckerberg, and the key executives around him. On the other hand, the function-based teams are based on the main corporate functions (like HR, product management, investor relations, and so on).
Goldman Sachs has a hierarchical structure with a clear chain of command and defined career advancement process. The structure is also underpinned by business-type divisions and function-based groups.
Google (Alphabet) has a cross-functional (team-based) organizational structure known as a matrix structure with some degree of flatness. Over the years, as the company scaled and it became a tech giant, its organizational structure is morphing more into a centralized organization.
IBM has an organizational structure characterized by product-based divisions, enabling its strategy to develop innovative and competitive products in multiple markets. IBM is also characterized by function-based segments that support product development and innovation for each product-based division, which include Global Markets, Integrated Supply Chain, Research, Development, and Intellectual Property.
McDonald’s has a divisional organizational structure where each division – based on geographical location – is assigned operational responsibilities and strategic objectives. The main geographical divisions are the US, internationally operated markets, and international developmental licensed markets. And on the other hand, the hierarchical leadership structure is organized around regional and functional divisions.
McKinsey & Company has a decentralized organizational structure with mostly self-managing offices, committees, and employees. There are also functional groups and geographic divisions with proprietary names.
Microsoft has a product-type divisional organizational structure based on functions and engineering groups. As the company scaled over time it also became more hierarchical, however still keeping its hybrid approach between functions, engineering groups, and management.
Nestlé has a geographical divisional structure with operations segmented into five key regions. For many years, Swiss multinational food and drink company Nestlé had a complex and decentralized matrix organizational structure where its numerous brands and subsidiaries were free to operate autonomously.
Nike has a matrix organizational structure incorporating geographic divisions. Nike’s matrix structure is also present at the regional and sub-regional levels. Managerial responsibility is segmented according to business unit (apparel, footwear, and equipment) and function (human resources, finance, marketing, sales, and operations).
Patagonia has a particular organizational structure, where its founder, Chouinard, disposed of the company’s ownership in the hands of two non-profits. The Patagonia Purpose Trust, holding 100% of the voting stocks, is in charge of defining the company’s strategic direction. And the Holdfast Collective, a non-profit, holds 100% of non-voting stocks, aiming to re-invest the brand’s dividends into environmental causes.
Samsung has a product-type divisional organizational structure where products determine how resources and business operations are categorized. The main resources around which Samsung’s corporate structure is organized are consumer electronics, IT, and device solutions. In addition, Samsung leadership functions are organized around a few career levels grades, based on experience (assistant, professional, senior professional, and principal professional).
Sony has a matrix organizational structure primarily based on function-based groups and product/business divisions. The structure also incorporates geographical divisions. In 2021, Sony announced the overhauling of its organizational structure, changing its name from Sony Corporation to Sony Group Corporation to better identify itself as the headquarters of the Sony group of companies skewing the company toward product divisions.
Starbucks follows a matrix organizational structure with a combination of vertical and horizontal structures. It is characterized by multiple, overlapping chains of command and divisions.
Tesla is characterized by a functional organizational structure with aspects of a hierarchical structure. Tesla does employ functional centers that cover all business activities, including finance, sales, marketing, technology, engineering, design, and the offices of the CEO and chairperson. Tesla’s headquarters in Austin, Texas, decide the strategic direction of the company, with international operations given little autonomy.
Toyota has a divisional organizational structure where business operations are centered around the market, product, and geographic groups. Therefore, Toyota organizes its corporate structure around global hierarchies (most strategic decisions come from Japan’s headquarter), product-based divisions (where the organization is broken down, based on each product line), and geographical divisions (according to the geographical areas under management).
Walmart has a hybrid hierarchical-functional organizational structure, otherwise referred to as a matrix structure that combines multiple approaches. On the one hand, Walmart follows a hierarchical structure, where the current CEO Doug McMillon is the only employee without a direct superior, and directives are sent from top-level management. On the other hand, the function-based structure of Walmart is used to categorize employees according to their particular skills and experience.
Gennaro is the creator of FourWeekMBA, which reached about four million business people, comprising C-level executives, investors, analysts, product managers, and aspiring digital entrepreneurs in 2022 alone | He is also Director of Sales for a high-tech scaleup in the AI Industry | In 2012, Gennaro earned an International MBA with emphasis on Corporate Finance and Business Strategy.
