Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO Best Practices from Initial Evaluations Geneva November 8 2012 Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO MY EXPECTATIONS OF EVALUATION IN WIPO Kjell Larsson ID: 801251
Download The PPT/PDF document "IAOD Evaluation Seminar :" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
IAOD Evaluation Seminar: “Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO – Best Practices from Initial Evaluations”
GenevaNovember, 8 2012
Demystifying Evaluation in WIPO:
MY EXPECTATIONS OF EVALUATION IN WIPO
Kjell Larsson
WIPO IAOC
Slide2Evaluation
Experience Participated in/responsible for evaluations commissioned by SE National Audit Office, Government, Parliament, Counties and OECDMain sectors: Education and Research, Industrial and Regional Development, Energy, Water management, Forestry, Environment, IT development and Maintenance, Governance and Effectiveness of Public Organisations partly/fully State ownedTeacher in Evaluation (Uppsala University)Institutional Capacity Building in Central and Eastern Europe (OECD/SIGMA, European Commission)Evaluation of Anti-Fraud and Corruption Programs and Institutions (European Commission/OLAF)
Slide3Expectations (1)Evaluation types include self-evaluations, as well as process, efficiency, effectiveness, results and effect/impact evaluations of key aspects of WIPO products and services
All evaluation types are carried out in parallel with the setting up of a “WIPO-system” for evaluation What is evaluated clearly reflects stakeholders needs. Subjects and evaluation types are carefully chosen on the basis of needs, timing and resources
Slide4Expectations (2)WIPO finds a wise balance (and peaceful co-existence) between “accountability” and a “learning approach”
All evaluations meet defined quality standards All ToRs and evaluations are subject to a defined and transparent quality assurance processThere are NO “PR-evaluations”How/who takes care of evaluation results (and recommendations) is defined and clarified beforehand
Slide5Expectations (3)The establishment of institutional memory to gather and share relevant knowledge on WIPO evaluations is clarified and its mechanisms are defined
WIPO evaluators have good and open relationships with academia and other organisations involved in evaluationDraft ToRs and reports are widely shared within WIPOFinal evaluation reports are published as a rule
Slide6Expectations (4)WIPO evaluations become a candidate for
the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2020!
Slide7Kjell Larsson
WIPO Independent Advisory Oversight Committeeemail: kjell.lar@ownit.nu
Contact: