A program can meet its delivery targets while leaving an important question unanswered: is it reaching the people it was intended to help, and is anything changing for them?
Two recent articles about evidence in government raise a more specific question. Should routine performance measurement concentrate on outputs and leave outcomes to evaluation? PPX’s perspective is that both functions need to keep the full results chain in view, while being clear about the different questions their evidence can answer.
A real disagreement about the remedy
The Broken Ruler argues that public-sector incentives and reporting cycles work against credible outcome reporting. Its proposed response includes narrowing routine performance measurement to outputs and strengthening independent evaluation of outcomes. This is an argument about how responsibilities should be organized, not simply a call for better indicators.
The Activity Illusion, which prompted The Broken Ruler, identifies the risk of treating evidence of completed work as evidence of meaningful progress. It also draws attention to what can happen after delivery: a project closes, but responsibility for establishing whether its benefits materialized becomes less clear.
These are practitioner perspectives, not findings that settle which institutional arrangement works best. We share the concern about mistaking delivery for results. Our proposed response is to connect performance measurement and evaluation more closely, rather than divide their attention between outputs and outcomes.
Keep the results chain connected
In our view, both functions should examine the connections between resources, activities, outputs, reach and outcomes over time. Those connections need not form a simple, linear sequence.
Not every useful result takes years to observe. Whether an initiative reaches its intended participants, establishes the relationships it needs or produces early changes can be examined while delivery is under way. Waiting for a possible future evaluation can leave managers without information they need now.
Evaluation can build on that monitoring and investigate questions requiring deeper analysis. The functions have different tasks, but separating their attention into outputs on one side and outcomes on the other risks breaking the connection between delivery and purpose.
Efficiency needs a destination
We also need to question what is missing when cost per transaction becomes the dominant account of value. An organization may deliver a countable output cheaply while failing to reach the intended group or exert the intended influence.
The implication is not to abandon output or cost information. It is to interpret that information alongside evidence about whom delivery reaches and what follows. An improvement in the cost of producing something is not, by itself, an improvement in the result the program exists to support.
Make the interpretation visible
The Behavioural Insight Brief: The Role of Narrative in Public Policy explains how narratives can shape interpretation, expectations and decisions. For PPX, this adds a useful caution: the account accompanying a dashboard matters as well as the measures themselves.
A performance story should distinguish what was delivered, what changed and what remains uncertain. That is our proposed application of the brief, not a claim that a persuasive narrative establishes causation. A coherent explanation can support understanding; it cannot replace evidence that an initiative contributed to an outcome.
A practical starting point
As a suggested PPX discussion exercise, bring a program manager, a performance measurement practitioner and an evaluator together around one current initiative. Ask:
- Which information do we need during delivery, rather than only at the next evaluation?
- Who will notice if the intended participants are not being reached?
- Which early changes can we examine, and what would require a stronger evaluative investigation?
- Who can act on the findings, and who will follow up?
These questions are prompts for clarifying responsibilities, not a new measurement framework. Monitoring an early change does not, on its own, prove that the program caused it.
Lesson learned
The choice need not be between collecting more indicators and commissioning more studies. The more useful task is to connect ongoing observation, evaluative inquiry and decisions without losing sight of outcomes between them.
For PPX, this means strengthening the capacity to use evaluative evidence, not only the capacity to produce evaluations. A clear division of work should support that use rather than make outcomes someone else’s responsibility.
Where in your organization does responsibility for following outcomes become unclear?
Sources and further reading
- The Broken Ruler. October 20, 2026.
- The Activity Illusion. October 13, 2026.
- Behavioural Insight Brief: The Role of Narrative in Public Policy. 2017.
Continue learning with PPX
Explore results-based management training or browse PPX learning events.
