It was high time we had our first post in English… We feel we are a purely glocal initiative and we do not see any contradiction in having a bi-dimensional focus. In fact it is not even dual, it could be considered utterly dialectical in as much as we do not see how can we disentangle the two dimensions: local and global.

In this case, we try to address a complex issue… We believe that evaluation has also two faces, one that is strongly pro-systemic and therefore reinforces many of the key (negative) vectors of this system (materialism, utilitarianism, blind/dictatorial positivism, etc.) and, not surprisingly, it can also be meta-systemic (i.e. it has strong transformational potential). This is so, because it can play the role of a «micro-deviation» (a small change that engenders high impact). Thus, if we change the way we see things, we may un-cover many so-called «natural» processes. One example of this is the campaign against the GDP indicator, or, beyond that, the degrowth movement.

One of the most interesting assignments we have carried out in the last years has been related to this: the SEN project. There, we performed the role of external evaluator. I was convinced to do so because I was asked to use an innovative (participatory) approach: the critical friend… (And many friends do know how I love to be critical!).

It was a challenge to evaluate complexity in a group that was led by public officials! I do not have anything against them, but,  maybe due to their position within the system, they are not so permeable to an effort to make them see the complexity beyond the obvious. Nevertheless, these were no «usual» public officials, they work in the area of social entrepreneurship, and many of them really believe in it. This made things easier.

Thus, it was nice to see how they admitted the need to bring in context, not linear relationships, the need to be adaptive, etc. Nevertheless, some other issues were more difficult: such as the need to increase what we call «organisational empathy» (the capacity of one organisation to put itself in the other organisation’s shoes) or their role as intra-entrepeneurs within public bodies.

However, on the other side (because this special project did bring in also Social Economy organisations to the driving seat), similar problems did arise! Maybe this is the reason why we believe that such projects requires someone to carry out that «third party» role which allows for complexity, global vision, systemic approach to be brought in the learning process. This is one of the proposals we have to help transformational projects/organisations increase their impact (scope) without being forced to grow.

But, what about the title? Well, one key element in overcoming the paradox of evaluation being pro- and meta-systemic it precisely the role of measuring… I do believe that it must play a secondary role in evaluation, leaving more room for a more complex (systemic, qualitative, etc.) assessment… Stop counting that much to pay attention to what it really counts!