Project monitoring and evaluation: a method for enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of aid project implementation
Citations
385 citations
Cites background or result from "Project monitoring and evaluation: ..."
...Further, the Project Management literature has focused little on international development projects, or typically, World Bank projects (Crawford and Bryce, 2003; Ahsan and Gunawan, 2010; Ika et al., 2010)....
[...]
...…designers and their beneficiaries, and the prevalence of rather bureaucratic rules and procedures (Honadle and Rosengard, 1983; Rondinelli, 1983; Gow and Morss, 1988; Youker, 1999; Kwak, 2002; Crawford and Bryce, 2003; Diallo and Thuillier, 2004, 2005; Khang and Moe, 2008; Ika et al., 2010)....
[...]
...…Development Agency (CIDA), 2001, p. 19; Khang and Moe, 2008), monitoring (Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), 2001, p. 20; Crawford and Bryce, 2003; Ika et al., 2010), and training (e.g. Kealey et al., 2005; Vickland and Nieuwenhujis, 2005) would increase the likelihood…...
[...]
...…project plans as a basis for contracting, the emphasis on resultsbased management, its accountability-for-results principle, and the strong procedures or guidelines orientation in IDPM, this research result is consistent with theory and practice (Crawford and Bryce, 2003; Ika et al., 2010)....
[...]
...…to date has been very narrow, examining projects and Project Management in general, despite the size of this industry sector ($120 billion U.S. a year in 2009), project proliferation, and the questionable outcomes of projects (Crawford and Bryce, 2003; Roodman, 2006; Ahsan and Gunawan, 2010)....
[...]
331 citations
Cites background from "Project monitoring and evaluation: ..."
...These projects are either implemented by recipient governments under a bilateral agreement with the donor country, or through an ‘implementing partner’ of the donor – frequently a nongovernmental organization or professional contractor [1]....
[...]
227 citations
Cites background from "Project monitoring and evaluation: ..."
...The terms ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ are commonly used in practice and within the literature on general and project management in a loose and ambiguous way, including reference to hard or soft projects [1]; programs [2]; approaches [3]; methodologies [4]; systems [5]; goals [6]; outcomes [7]; aspects [8]; criteria [9,10]; measures [11]; costs [12]; situations [13]; issues [14]; knowledge [15]; ideas [16]; logic [17]; values [18]; and, skills [19]....
[...]
219 citations
189 citations
References
902 citations
254 citations
157 citations
124 citations
118 citations