Esosa Tiven Orhue

Esosa Tiven Orhue

Founder/CEO
E-Warehouse Consulting
Nigeria

I am energetic driven professional with over ten years’ experience. I have picked interest in political/policies analysis and formulation, leadership and management strategies, programme/project management, research and coaching and marketing insight, both in private and public sectors.

My contributions

  • Evaluability Assessments: An invitation to reflect and discuss

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria
      Dear colleagues and members, my contribution.
      To my knowledge and understanding I 'think' this is a more proactive and faster way of achieving a Sustainable Development Goals. Looking at the existing order of programmes or projects. Its drive, helps to eliminate the bottleneck associated with programme or project management by serving as a back-stop of programme/project, in data management and evaluation.
      It is a redirectional mechanisms for programme/project work place and work force, that help actualize and facilitate goals and objectives. Its systematic effectiveness and efficiency in programme and project management industry is a strength. However;
      - It helps build the initial gap that may had been created by colleagues and redirect them to the purpose and programme/project objectives.
      - It modifies programme/project running and outcome for better funding and stakeholders participation.
      - It brings visibility, clarity and faster actionable approaches and mechanisms for delivery.
      -It serves as an information management hub and integration of existing programmes/projects in line with funders and stakeholders goals and aims.
      Experimentally, both organization and nation can successfully practice this back-stop of assessments for policy makers and programme implementation. Invariably, it is a strength and force to programme/project management dynamics and delivery in the industry and society.

      Thank you.
      Esosa.

  • Management matters: exploring the link between management models and the use of evaluations

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria

      Dear Colleagues/Members,

      My EvalForward Contribution.

      Beginning by initiating the important of the role of technical expertise and management of evaluation are both important and vital to the existence and delivery of quality evaluation and implementation programmes. However, both are essential to research institution of evaluation, to enhance work quality and data management. Expressly speaking, there is need for technical expertise and need for a continuous management in the vicinity of evaluation which are fundamental principles of evaluation. Both work hand in hand to strengthen the beauty and quality of evaluation in the concept of research, programme management and policy implementation. In other words, whatever that needs to be researched or might have been researched out there is method or methodology to that outcome and success. Both function to synergy and collaborate to foster the development of evaluation and data communities for enhancement and strengthening.

      In furtherance to the concepts, does a supervisor(s) differs from manager? In a nutshell, this connotes the use of the word, often seen or perceived as external body or technical adviser that validates the team work or research work. It gives a different view to the fundamental principles on quality on technical ground or management. Majorly, as an advisory body that serves and initiates a design work, procedure, process or guide to work with or follow objectively. Invariably, the perception of this depends on the concept internally and externally that tracks the performance and input technically to evaluate the process and success of evaluation. The manager is more of effective team value that enhances the principle and objective of evaluation and programme. Again, manager serves as a team player in the workplace, the demand is in line with management goal as a support team for management decision and enforcement. Elucidating this concepts from both ends, externally and internally day to day activities of evaluators, it is more of managerial concept team work which is broader in nature than the latter that is technically outline. Diplomatically speaking, both leverage on the differences to succeed as one interchangeably entity.

      Meanwhile, in my view, the roles of both might differ a bit but have one central focus point in evaluation management mechanism which is accurate data management, research and programme management.

      A manager may be more of team work or player than a supervisor in this context but obviously they are same in delivery. Ensure that stakeholders’ concepts are well delivered and served because of team oriented.

      Internally a manager participates in day to day activities of evaluation than supervisor who prioritize its validation of work done and create guideline.

      A supervisor is more of a technical adviser or input than a manager who is more of welfare, team concern and continuity of programme management.  It all depends on the usage of the word and perspective.

      A manager enhances the principle of accountability in workplace and continuity of better data and programme management. It is more of management incline than supervisor.

      Manager might be broad in terms of knowledge ability in management community while that of supervisor might be streamline or restrain to a specific area or subject.

      However, the view of both in evaluation management techniques and skills might differ a bit but the mind is one goal and result for the team, research and the programme.

      It is a certain principle and mechanisms that organization, programme/project must be carried out and function this respect to decision making and implementation. There is always a synergy that builds collaboration on the ground of technicality and management objectively in programme. The main purpose is for both to be aware for the reason of the outcome that is basically decision based making and implementation in collaboration modalities and implementation. However, there is always room for both to calibrate in knowledge integration and management.

  • How are we progressing in SDG evaluation?

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria

      Dear members,

      My contribution.

      Evaluation is a critical factor and core subject when assessing the progress towards UN SDGs. The emphasis placed on the role of evaluation in SDGs' achievement is justified because its contribution to making a difference and the institutionalized data and statistics developmental strides enhancing SDG-related progress across nations. Evaluation is vital in research and in programmes/projects embarked by individuals, institutions and nations in line with SDGs. The outcomes of programmes/projects are better known thanks to evaluation. Ascertaining the levels of progress and how it can upscale the necessary gap bridging between or among nations can be perfectly done by those involved in evaluation.

      For example, the inequality in world's economy between global north and south can be measured and better understood using reliable data sources through evaluations. Only when a nation's economy has been evaluated with reliable data/evidence, assistance can be provided to bridge the inequalities. Without data validation by the evaluators, no help can be sought to make progress towards the UN SDGs. To understand economic progress  the evaluation of relevant data is required to validate the findings. As an example, a research study on data from USA and China provided me a sound comparison of their development levels and progress. Evaluation is key to UN SDGs accomplishments and success. Evaluation is knowledge, findings . Furthermore, evaluationis what validates the findings and empirical facts of research and relevant programmes.

      Empirical facts can be validated by economy indexes and indicators. In the case of USA and China the researcher got its information from World Bank and IMF. These are reliable sources which can validate the strenght of their economies  andtheir global hegemony. This research is an important verdict to ascertain the global north and south economy inequality before calling for programmes/projects’ implementation to bridge the gap. When the issue(s) is known, fixing it won't be difficult, that is the stands of evaluation.

      However, sustaining SDGs progress, countries most know the fundamental issues for developmental strides of their economies. This is why evaluation is paramount to SDGs developmental goals in the world. This will help to validate the progress made so far and how to improve on it or them. In addition the 17 SDGs need proper institutionalized monitoring and evaluation to make a difference in world's economy trajectory growth and developmental sustainability. Evaluation contribution to SDGs target is imperative whether as research or programmes/projects. Nevertheless, I think there is need to have an institutionalized governing data body that evaluates the progress of nation's development from local areas, states' level, national, sub-national and international levels. This will really help and assist UN SDGs targets. The local level areas will give the true pictures of communities development at national level of a nation in SDG programmes/projects and research.

      Moreso, identifying what works, begins with local level evaluators to national and international levels. It trickles from down up. If truly there is an institutionalized governing body for data evaluation and validation, what works will be easy to identify and lessons learned will be made known for effective SDGs implementation and progress. All these factors have to do with cultural differences which means a lot in developmental strides of a nation. This is why local and national evaluation is paramount to SDGs targets. In other words, what works for country A might no work for country B, that is to say, environmental factors and differences and influence are subject and better understood through local and national evaluators for progress of SDGs programmes/projects or goals. Evaluation is a key component to reach out to maximize a possible change of world's economy development, peace, justice, zero hunger, quality healthcare, good education and no poverty etc.

      Finally, to have a true comprehensive nature and effective development across board in nations, let there be mixture of UN, sub-national, national, local evaluators integration, comprises of different bodies from federal, state, local levels, private sector, civil society organizations, NGOs and UN agencies in monitoring and evaluating SDGs targets implementation and sustainability. This will bring policies of inclusiveness for all stakeholders for SDGs achievements globally.

      Thank you.

      Esosa.

       

  • Disability inclusion in evaluation

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria

      Dear Members/Colleagues,

      My EvalForward contribution,

      First of all, humanity does not exempt people with physical disabilities from contributing to development programmes or projects, irrespective of who they are in the society. If you are an asset you are a great contributor to advancement of knowledge in human development. People with disability should be entitled to every benefit in support of human diversity in a society. In other words, disability inclusion and practices in evaluation should also be encouraged, given priority and value in the society. Why? Because policies, evaluation are made by mental knowledge, not physical power which gives inclusiveness. Meanwhile;

      1. Evaluation is not a physical exertion of energy, but mental exertion of energy which includes disability inclusiveness contribution to the evaluation development world.

      2. Evaluation an be strategically practiced with the assistance of technological gadgets on their parts.

      3. Physically challenged people can come up with their invention that will help them in evaluation system, such as technological inventions and policies that will strengthen their inclusiveness.

      4. According to UN support for their participation, if the needs are given to support their physical strength and energy, people with disabilities are as good as every other human in driving the research outcome of evaluation implementation.

      Thank you.

      Esosa.

  • How to evaluate science, technology and innovation in a R4D context? New guidelines offer some solutions

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria

      Dear members/colleagues,

      My EvalForward contribution.

      Today the world’s politics and economy are driven by science and technology. The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, HIV epidemic, global market policies, internet governance etc require analytical tools for effective evaluation. So the question is: can monitoring and evaluation measure and keep up with the advent of the science and technology era?

      Innovation has brought the world to this level of development. Therefore, innovative methodologies and data science applied in science and technology should also be used for monitoring and evaluating the progress of programs and outcomes.

      More so, research should help evaluation to be a more analytical tool for implementation strategies. Since evaluation is science-oriented because it uses research methodologies and because of its purpose to bring improvement, evaluation should be able to generate innovative ideas and concepts for the global economy perspective.

      Therefore, the importance and roles of evaluation in science and technology and programmes implementation and outcomes should be emphasized in the guidelines

      Thank you.

       

  • Reporting evaluation results or communicating evaluation results?

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria

      Dear colleagues/members,

      My EvalForward contribution.

      These are two distinct inseparable views in monitoring and evaluating systems that produce results for policy making and implementation. When these two views are understood there is tendency of improvement and implementation strategy of research and finding that enforces desirable policy. The reporting is the analytical tool that communicates the findings of a research to stakeholders. Which makes it empirical fact that once accepted becomes evidential policy.

      Reporting helps to know the actual data needed to communicate the rightful results that could improve the outcome of programmes or projects implementation for economy and human development in any sector. Reporting tools help to maximize this actual fact of M&E information system for programmes and include the state or level of project delivery. This reporting tool must be available for better and clear communication that is understood by public and private sector stakeholders.

      This function systematically from M&E reporting state to M&E communicating state to stakeholders, partners and implementing organizations which could form economic policy for growth and development depending on the sector. So, understanding this important knowledge mechanism for organizations or nations could improve the governing system for better decision and policy whether in agriculture, science, humanity or any sector. They are the knowledge basis for policy making and implementation.

      In addition;

      The two elements need to harmonize and create synergy for common ground that affects the outcome of results.

      This should begin from the start, that is, from the design stage to implementation stage to have a clear knowledge of the programmes/project for decision and implementation by stakeholders.

      Their recommendations should be empirical facts for improvement, implementation and execution by stakeholders.

      Thank you.

      Esosa

  • What type of evaluator are you?

    Discussion

  • Developing effective, inclusive and gender responsive MEAL systems

    Discussion

    • Esosa Tiven Orhue

      Founder/CEO E-Warehouse Consulting
      Nigeria

      Dear EvalForward members

      My contribution on the MEL&MEAL.

      Monitoring and evaluation systems cut-across all sectors of the economy: this makes them an important means for learning, where researchers and policies makers should go for information, knowledge and update with relevant statistics and data for government policies, programmes and projects. However, to be fully integrated as a learning entity and process, past and present information and data for government policies, programmes/projects should be kept/stored and institutionalized for learning processes and for independent and other bodies to go for information and data collection for research purposes and policies.

      Often, in monitoring and evaluation, the primary interests are outcomes and impacts of the programmes/projects leaving others unattended, including government policies that affect the economy growth and development and gender issues, where inclusiveness should be most important to all stakeholders. Making MEAL/MEL an avenue of learning would create and broaden the scope of monitoring, evaluation and learning systems: it could become a national learning institution which would serve and make inclusiveness important to all. Inclusiveness will ensure participatory mechanism in the development of the system itself.

      Basically, a programme or project sustained would be based on a monitoring and evaluation system because it is what reviews the outcome and impact on the society. In this case it becomes a sustainable effect, and a means in which programmes/projects thrive continuously. It should be institutionalized to create a pathway and avenue for learning.

      Meanwhile, because they have been mostly limited to programmes/projects, MEL/MEAL systems have not be able to broaden their scope to learning and their importance to national growth and development. Institutionalizing them would eliminate this limitation. Rural development has not be fully considered nor captured and integrated because of accessibility of communities for information and data collection. Emphasis should be placed on rural development to ensure information is well gathered for update and development. This would also help agricultural development and emergency needs at any time.

      Ultimately, if MEL/MEAL is a system let it be institutionalized to serve as a national databased for all sectors.

      Thanks.

      Esosa