Application of logic models in a large scientific research program
It is the purpose of this article to discuss the development and application of a logic model in the context of a large scientific research program within the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). CSIRO is Australia's national science agency and is a publicly funded part of Australia's innovation system. It conducts mission-driven scientific research focussed on delivering results with relevance and impact for Australia, where impact is defined and measured in economic, environmental and social terms at the national level. The Australian Government has recently signalled an increasing emphasis on performance assessment and evaluation, which in the CSIRO context implies an increasing emphasis on ensuring and demonstrating the impact of its research programs. CSIRO continues to develop and improve its approaches to impact planning and evaluation, including conducting a trial of a program logic approach in the CSIRO Preventative Health National Research Flagship. During the trial, improvements were observed in clarity of the research goals and path to impact, as well as in alignment of science and support function activities with national challenge goals. Further benefits were observed in terms of communication of the goals and expected impact of CSIRO's research programs both within CSIRO and externally. The key lesson learned was that significant value was achieved through the process itself, as well as the outcome. Recommendations based on the CSIRO trial may be of interest to managers of scientific research considering developing similar logic models for their research projects. The CSIRO experience has shown that there are significant benefits to be gained, especially if the project participants have a major role in the process of developing the logic model.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Fielden, Sarah J. & Rusch, Melanie L. & Masinda, Mambo Tabu & Sands, Jim & Frankish, Jim & Evoy, Brian, 2007. "Key considerations for logic model development in research partnerships: A Canadian case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 115-124, May.
- Kaplan, Sue A. & Garrett, Katherine E., 2005. "The use of logic models by community-based initiatives," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 167-172, May.
- McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:34:y:2011:i:3:p:174-184. 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: (Zhang, Lei)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.