 Being smart about writing SMART objectivesMay Britt Bjerke and Ralph Renger Evaluation and Program Planning, 2017, vol. 61, issue C, 125-127 Abstract: This article challenges the conventional wisdom in mainstream evaluation regarding the process for developing specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) objectives. The article notes several advantages of mainstreaming the SMART method including program capacity building and being able to independently monitor progress toward process and outcome objectives. It is argued the one size fits all approach for writing SMART objectives is misleading. The context in which the evaluation is conducted is a key deciding factor in how and when the SMART criteria should be applied. Without an appreciation of the evaluation context, mainstream users may be developing objectives that are far from smart. A case example is presented demonstrating a situation where a stepwise, rather than simultaneous application of the SMART criteria was necessary. Learning from this case, recommendations are forwarded for adjusting how SMART criteria should be presented in mainstream evaluation manuals/guides. Keywords: Objective development; Mainstreaming; Evaluation guidance; SMART objectives (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:61:y:2017:i:c:p:125-127 DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.12.009 Access Statistics for this article Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.