Rosy Goals, Reactive Practice

Interpreting Programme Failure

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Much evaluation research has focussed on the impact of innovative health programmes, yet there have been few attempts to identify the reasons underlying reported programme successes or failures. This shortcoming has reduced the generalisability of research findings, and hence their policy relevance. This paper explores the reported failure of two Queensland community health centres to improve the health status of the communities served. The data indicate a lack of fit between pro gramme goals and practice. Strong support for the specified goals at all levels of implementation, however, negates the hypothesis that the evaluation was based on “unreal” goals. Four alternative explanations are developed — “grandiose goals”, “bureaucratic red tape”, “staff fallibility” and the “exigencies of the job”. The paper concludes with an assessment of the relevance of this analysis to other innovative health programmes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)218-232
Number of pages15
JournalJournal of Sociology
Volume20
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 1984
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

health
evaluation research
health status
community
staff
lack
evaluation

Cite this

@article{a7718eb488b64d6dad1287d6d2b36032,
title = "Rosy Goals, Reactive Practice: Interpreting Programme Failure",
abstract = "Much evaluation research has focussed on the impact of innovative health programmes, yet there have been few attempts to identify the reasons underlying reported programme successes or failures. This shortcoming has reduced the generalisability of research findings, and hence their policy relevance. This paper explores the reported failure of two Queensland community health centres to improve the health status of the communities served. The data indicate a lack of fit between pro gramme goals and practice. Strong support for the specified goals at all levels of implementation, however, negates the hypothesis that the evaluation was based on “unreal” goals. Four alternative explanations are developed — “grandiose goals”, “bureaucratic red tape”, “staff fallibility” and the “exigencies of the job”. The paper concludes with an assessment of the relevance of this analysis to other innovative health programmes.",
author = "Gibson, {D. M.}",
year = "1984",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/144078338402000204",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "218--232",
journal = "Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology",
issn = "1440-7833",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "2",

}

Rosy Goals, Reactive Practice : Interpreting Programme Failure. / Gibson, D. M.

In: Journal of Sociology, Vol. 20, No. 2, 01.01.1984, p. 218-232.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Rosy Goals, Reactive Practice

T2 - Interpreting Programme Failure

AU - Gibson, D. M.

PY - 1984/1/1

Y1 - 1984/1/1

N2 - Much evaluation research has focussed on the impact of innovative health programmes, yet there have been few attempts to identify the reasons underlying reported programme successes or failures. This shortcoming has reduced the generalisability of research findings, and hence their policy relevance. This paper explores the reported failure of two Queensland community health centres to improve the health status of the communities served. The data indicate a lack of fit between pro gramme goals and practice. Strong support for the specified goals at all levels of implementation, however, negates the hypothesis that the evaluation was based on “unreal” goals. Four alternative explanations are developed — “grandiose goals”, “bureaucratic red tape”, “staff fallibility” and the “exigencies of the job”. The paper concludes with an assessment of the relevance of this analysis to other innovative health programmes.

AB - Much evaluation research has focussed on the impact of innovative health programmes, yet there have been few attempts to identify the reasons underlying reported programme successes or failures. This shortcoming has reduced the generalisability of research findings, and hence their policy relevance. This paper explores the reported failure of two Queensland community health centres to improve the health status of the communities served. The data indicate a lack of fit between pro gramme goals and practice. Strong support for the specified goals at all levels of implementation, however, negates the hypothesis that the evaluation was based on “unreal” goals. Four alternative explanations are developed — “grandiose goals”, “bureaucratic red tape”, “staff fallibility” and the “exigencies of the job”. The paper concludes with an assessment of the relevance of this analysis to other innovative health programmes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84970156492&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/144078338402000204

DO - 10.1177/144078338402000204

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 218

EP - 232

JO - Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology

JF - Australian and New Zealand Journal of Sociology

SN - 1440-7833

IS - 2

ER -