IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cybernetics: A possible solution for the "knowledge gap" between "external" and "internal" in evaluation processes


  • Levin-Rozalis, Miri


This paper addresses the issue of the knowledge gap between evaluators and the entity being evaluated: the dilemma of the knowledge of professional evaluators vs. the in-depth knowledge of the evaluated subjects. In order to optimize evaluative outcomes, the author suggests an approach based on ideas borrowed from the science of cybernetics as a method of evaluation--one that enables in-depth perception of the evaluated field without jeopardizing a rigorous study or the evaluator's professionalism. The paper focuses on the main concepts that deal with this dilemma - showing how cybernetics combines the different bodies of knowledge of the different stakeholders, including the professional evaluator, resulting in a coherent body of knowledge created mainly by those internal to the process, owned by them, and relevant to all - those who are internal and those who are external and their different purposes.

Suggested Citation

  • Levin-Rozalis, Miri, 2010. "Cybernetics: A possible solution for the "knowledge gap" between "external" and "internal" in evaluation processes," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 333-342, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:4:p:333-342

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. repec:wsi:wschap:9789812773654_0025 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:wsi:wschap:9789812773654_0001 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. repec:wsi:wschap:9789812773654_0007 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Ross Williams, 2006. "Introduction to the Policy Forum," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 39(4), pages 409-411, December.
    5. Parkinson, Sarah, 2009. "Power and perceptions in participatory monitoring and evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 229-237, August.
    6. repec:wsi:wschap:9789812773654_0013 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Nikolay Nenovsky & S. Statev, 2006. "Introduction," Post-Print halshs-00260898, HAL.
    8. M. Ruth & K. Donaghy & P. Kirshen, 2006. "Introduction," Chapters,in: Regional Climate Change and Variability, chapter 1 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Sonnichsen, Richard C., 1988. "Advocacy evaluation: A model for internal evaluation offices," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 141-148, January.
    10. repec:wsi:wschap:9789812773654_0019 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:4:p:333-342. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.