An organization can know a great deal about its activities and still have unanswered questions about its outcomes. More information does not necessarily close that gap.
Colin Ross calls attention to this problem in his discussion of the performance audit paradox. Evidence can strengthen confidence about operations and outputs without producing equivalent insight into longer-term outcomes, contribution and public value.
Distinguish description from evaluation
Ross distinguishes descriptive assurance from evaluative assurance. Evidence that a process exists or an activity occurred is not the same as a judgement about whether it made a meaningful difference.
This is not an argument against administrative data, indicators or recognized practices. It is a reminder to examine the conclusion the evidence can support. A report can be accurate about what happened while leaving the most important question about results unresolved.
Make reasoning visible
The article argues for disciplined professional judgement supported by explicit reasoning, triangulation, competing explanations, proportionality and transparency about uncertainty.
The implication is not that judgement should replace evidence. Rather, evidence needs a reasoned interpretation. Readers should be able to understand how the conclusion was reached, what alternative explanations were considered and where uncertainty remains. This makes a judgement open to examination rather than presenting it as an unexplained assertion.
Ask what the evidence demonstrates
As a practical reflection exercise, take one conclusion from a performance report and ask three questions. Does the evidence demonstrate activity, a change in conditions, or a contribution to an outcome? What other explanation could fit the observation? What remains uncertain?
These questions are suggested prompts for discussion, not an audit methodology. They can help practitioners avoid treating a large volume of evidence as a substitute for clarity about the performance story.
The same distinction can be useful when planning information collection. Start with the conclusion or decision that needs support, rather than assuming that more data will necessarily provide the answer.
Lesson learned
Confidence is useful when we are clear about what we are confident in. Confidence that activities occurred is different from confidence about effectiveness or public value.
For results practitioners, the challenge is to connect reliable observations with a transparent account of their meaning. This is where evaluation, performance measurement and assurance communities have a productive conversation to share.
Does your current evidence explain what changed, or mainly confirm what was done?
Use that question in a PPX learning discussion to compare how different professional communities move from information to insight.
Sources and further reading
Continue learning with PPX
Explore results-based management training, browse PPX learning events, or join the PPX community.
Comments are closed.