Results-based management (RBM) helps organisations to reach their desired development results by maximising the impact of individual and collective interventions. Managing for sustainable development results is a management approach providing the framework, tools and guidance for strategic planning, risk management, performance monitoring, evaluation and knowledge management.
Managing for sustainable development results
Abstract
Managing for sustainable development results serves four purposes:
Decision making: Steering the development co-operation programme and allocating resources strategically to enhance effectiveness and impact.
Accountability: Providing feedback to your domestic stakeholders and partners on achievements and challenges.
Learning: Understanding what is working and what is not, and making changes where needed.
Communication: Raising awareness about your contributions to global development to build public trust and mobilise citizens.
Results are defined as the outputs, outcomes or impacts of development interventions. The links between the elements are as important as the results themselves, with each element contributing to the next:
Inputs: Financial, human and material resources used for the development intervention.
Activities: Actions taken or work performed through which inputs, such as funds, technical assistance and other resources, are mobilised to produce specific outputs.
Outputs: Products, capital goods and services resulting from a development intervention. Outputs may also include changes contributing to the achievement of outcomes.
Outcomes: The short-term and medium-term effects of an intervention’s outputs.
Impacts: The higher-level effects of an intervention’s outcome. These can include ultimate effects or longer-term changes that are intended and unintended, positive or negative.
Organisations have full control over inputs, activities and outputs (performance management), and partial control over outcomes (results management).
A focus on results is needed at each stage of a programme cycle:
Note: An indicator is a quantitative or qualitative factor or variable that provides a simple and reliable means to measure achievement, reflect the changes connected to an intervention or to help assess the performance of a development actor.
The OECD DAC Guiding Principles on Managing for Sustainable Development Results offer a roadmap and a checklist for development ministries, agencies and partners in their path to develop a results-based management system. The guidelines identify six principles for development co-operation providers, to be interpreted in line with each organisation’s reality:
Note: Section I.2 and D.4 of the OECD DAC Peer Review Analytical Framework set out the expectations of the Development Assistance Committee on planning and managing for lasting sustainable development results.
1. Support the SDGs and desired change. Development organisations set clear expected results, measured by indicators aligned to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to maximise the impact of efforts towards social, economic and environmentally sustainable development that leaves no one behind.
Switzerland’s International Co-operation Strategy 2025-28 includes overarching objectives and sub-objectives aligned to the SDGs. Switzerland’s results framework has a menu of standardised outcome and output indicators to choose from. They contribute both to the strategy’s objectives and to SDG targets.
2. Adapt to context. The systems, methods and approaches used by development organisations should be flexible. They can then be tailored to different operational contexts, modalities of engagement and types of partnership. A number of agencies now aim to encourage more adaptive theories of change.
Sweden’s anthology of theories of change (TOC) explores their history, use and practice as valuable tools for planning, learning and evaluation. This helps staff assess whether the TOC is correct or should be adapted.
3. Enhance country ownership, mutual accountability and transparency. Synchronising planning cycles and aligning results frameworks can help to minimise costs and avoid duplications while fostering country ownership, mutual accountability and transparency.
New Zealand uses SDG indicators to support a country-focused results approach. This simplified approach enables to plan and monitor progress towards shared results with partner countries, while creating space for country-level learning and reinforcing transparency and mutual accountability based on solid data.
4. Maximise use of results information. While responding to communication and accountability needs, results information should be systematically used for learning and decision making in order to improve delivery and enhance impact.
KOICA shares evaluation findings and lessons briefs from country portfolio reviews (e.g. Bolivia, Cambodia, Uzbekistan) and evaluations compiled by sector (e.g. public administration, healthcare and education). Checklists associated with the lesson briefs serve to inform future iterations of country partnership strategies, project planning, execution, and monitoring and evaluation.
5. Foster a culture of results and learning. A culture of results and learning should be promoted and sustained through consistent leadership and supported by appropriate guidance, tools and capacity building as well as proper incentives.
Global Affairs Canada (GAC) has developed and implemented a comprehensive Capacity Building Strategy on Managing for Results in order to build an internal culture of results.
The Netherlands organised a “fail fest”, to encourage a culture of learning from mistakes among staff, backed by leadership support, open discussions and a conducive atmosphere.
6. Develop a manageable and reliable system. Keeping the results system manageable, reliable and adaptable requires continuous effort, with ongoing capacity building at all levels. The system and tools can be developed in an iterative way.
Finland has conducted evaluations of its results-based management system every three to four years since 2011. It uses the results of each evaluation to improve the system gradually and maintain it as fit for purpose, user-friendly and lean.
How do we know if DAC members are moving in the right direction?
Capacity is built progressively to plan, define and monitor results at project level.
Information is aggregated and data from project-level monitoring is used to measure progress against the expected corporate results.
Beyond measurement, results are analysed and used for strategic planning and learning from successes and failures.
Flexibility is increased by building on learning. With a results culture and skills well ingrained, a more flexible and adaptable results approach is applied.
Guiding Principles on Managing for Sustainable Development Results, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Impact by Design – Effective Results Frameworks for Sustainable Development, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Learning from results-based management evaluations and reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris.
DAC Network on Development Evaluation, OECD [website].
Evaluation Criteria and the Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results-Based Management for Sustainable Development, OECD Publishing, Paris.
DAC Evaluation Resource Centre (DEReC), OECD [website].
More Framework principles are available on Development Co-operation TIPs • Tools Insights Practices.
