Participation of marginalized groups in evaluation: Mission impossible?

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2009.09.002Get rights and content

Abstract

Responsive evaluation facilitates a dialogical process by creating social conditions that enhance equal input from all stakeholders. However, when multiple stakeholders are involved, some groups tend to go unheard or not be taken seriously. In these cases, empowerment of the more silent voices is needed. The inclusion of marginalized groups in evaluation is thus a challenge for evaluators. It raises questions about how to include all stakeholders in the evaluation process in a way that empowers marginalized stakeholder groups, and at the same time is acceptable for the dominant stakeholder groups. In this article we describe our experiences with a responsive evaluation project on the participation of client councils in policy processes in a Dutch residential care and nursing home organization. We focus on the value of hermeneutic dialogue (fostering mutual understanding and learning processes) in addressing the challenges of working with stakeholders in unequal relationships.

Section snippets

Participation of ‘marginalized groups’ in evaluation

The participation and ownership of multiple stakeholders in evaluation is increasingly being promoted (Cousins and Whitmore, 1998, King, 2007). Involving multiple stakeholders, including those with ‘marginalized’ or ‘silenced’ voices, is a challenging task for evaluators due to unequal power relationships (Abma, 2001, French and Swain, 1997, Koch, 2000, McDonald, 2008, Mertens, 1995, Mertens et al., 1994, VanderPlaat, 1999, Widdershoven, 2001) and the risk of conflict (Markiewicz, 2005, Owen,

Background and goals

We were asked by a residential care and nursing home organization in the south of the Netherlands to evaluate how the participation of client councils in policy processes was experienced, and how it could be improved. Our evaluation thus aimed to bring forth recommendations for practical improvement of the participation of client councils in decision-making processes. However, it rapidly emerged that the client councils felt that they were not taken seriously by managers. The empowerment of the

Case example: stakeholder issues and learning processes

In this section we describe the main stakeholder issues that arose. The frustrations between managers and client councils can be understood by examining the underlying divergence of value stances among these stakeholders concerning their practices (Abma, 2000a, Abma, 2000b, Greene, 2001, Schwandt, 2008). In responsive evaluation, these underlying values and tensions are brought to light through the dialogical process. Only then can differences be recast as vehicles for learning.

Discussion and conclusions

This project provides insights into how the participation of client councils in residential care and nursing homes might be improved. We can conclude that there is more to the participatory practice of client councils than just having a say and negotiating. Rather, the participation of client councils is a dynamic process. Room should be given to hermeneutic dialogue as well as horizontal and deliberative communication. Further, abstract policy issues do not invite client councils and managers

Lessons learned

Like the stakeholders, responsive evaluators are part of the social learning process as well (Abma and Widdershoven, 2008, Wadsworth, 2001). In carrying out our project, we learned some lessons that we feel may be valuable to others involved in responsive evaluation and the participation of marginalized groups. Responsive evaluation is generally an intensive and time-consuming evaluation methodology. However, we conducted our evaluation in just six months, indicating that it is actually

Acknowledgements

First of all, we would like to acknowledge all the people involved in this research project for their openness and trust. We would also like to thank the organization for supporting this work in financial and practical terms. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the EES Conference in Lisbon in October 2008. We would like to thank Jennifer Greene and Thomas Schwandt from the University of Illinois, USA, for their useful comments and profound feedback on that earlier version of this

Vivianne E. Baur, MA, is PhD student in the Department of Medical Humanities of the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, The Netherlands. Her research projects focus on improving the participation of older people in policy processes within the setting of residential elderly care.

References (54)

  • T.A. Abma

    Opening thoughts

    Evaluation

    (2001)
  • T.A. Abma

    Learning by telling: Storytelling workshops as an organizational learning intervention

    Management Learning

    (2003)
  • T.A. Abma

    The practice and politics of responsive evaluation

    American Journal of Evaluation

    (2006)
  • T.A. Abma

    Social relations of evaluation

  • T.A. Abma

    Situated learning in communities of practice: Evaluation of coercion in psychiatry as a case

    Evaluation

    (2007)
  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Zeggenschap in wetenschap. Patiëntenparticipatie in theorie en praktijk

    (2007)
  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Patients as partners in responsive research: Methodological notions for collaborations in mixed research teams

    Qualitative Health Research

    (2009)
  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Stake's responsive evaluation: Core ideas and evolution

  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Sharing stories: Narrative and dialogue in responsive nursing evaluation

    Evaluation and the Health Professions

    (2005)
  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Responsieve methodologie: Interactief onderzoek in de praktijk

    (2006)
  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Evaluation and/as social relation

    Evaluation

    (2008)
  • T.A. Abma et al.

    Dialogical nursing ethics: The quality of freedom restrictions

    Nursing Ethics

    (2008)
  • S. Arnstein

    A ladder of citizen participation

    Journal of the American Institute of Planners

    (1969)
  • J.F. Caron-Flinterman et al.

    Patient participation in decision making on biomedical research: Changing the network

    Science, Technology and Human Values

    (2007)
  • J.B. Cousins et al.

    Framing participatory evaluation

  • B.J. Dewar

    Beyond tokenistic involvement of older people in research—A framework for future development and understanding

    International Journal of Older People Nursing in Association with Journal of Clinical Nursing

    (2005)
  • R. Gilroy

    Why can’t more people have a say? Learning to work with older people

    Ageing and Society

    (2003)
  • Cited by (44)

    • Community participation in general health initiatives in high and upper-middle income countries: A systematic review exploring the nature of participation, use of theories, contextual drivers and power relations in community participation

      2018, Social Science and Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      It is apparent that the public health interventions described in these papers borrowed from general community participation principles and approaches in guiding their initiatives, for instance through the use of deliberative approaches to community engagement (Gregory et al., 2008) and public consultation design principles (Abelson et al., 2004). One study described the use of a participatory evaluation approach to assess client councils in policy processes focusing on the value of hermeneutic dialogue in addressing challenges of working with parties in unequal relationships (Baur et al., 2010). Table 1 presents a list of the papers and a description of the theory, framework or underlying approach used.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    Vivianne E. Baur, MA, is PhD student in the Department of Medical Humanities of the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, The Netherlands. Her research projects focus on improving the participation of older people in policy processes within the setting of residential elderly care.

    Tineke A. Abma, PhD, is an associate professor and research coordinator of the research program Autonomy and Participation in Chronic Care, Department of Medical Humanities of the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, The Netherlands.

    Guy A.M. Widdershoven, PhD, is a professor of medical philosophy and ethics and Head of the Department of Medical Humanities of the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, The Netherlands.

    View full text