Table A8. Summary of the PDAP outcome... | Emerald Publishing

Table A8.

Summary of the PDAP outcome assessment, with supporting evidence and consideration of contextual factors and causal mechanisms affecting outcome realization

Results	Illustrative evidence
Outcome assessment	Summary of supporting evidence for the assessment	Contextual factors and causal mechanisms affecting how the outcome was realized
Other researchers become aware of the research Realized, clear project contribution	Documents: The proposal outlines the PI’s intention and strategies to reach academic audiences; presenting at conferences was an influential avenue to network and share findings with other researchers, and the feedback received from interdisciplinary researchers was positive; the SSHRC Storyteller Showcase required a short video summarizing the research to facilitate further awareness-building; the PI’s chapter contribution to the DSocSci book and promotion of the book could have spread awareness of the research. Web media: The dissertation is available online, via the RRU library repository for research and the PI’s website, making the research easily accessible; this website also hosts a blog, which shares reflections on the research experience and findings. Interviews: Researchers within the PI’s sphere of influence were aware of the project context and its findings. Indicators: The PI attended and presented at five conferences targeted to academic audiences; once available online, the PI received an immediate request to use the findings; being an award winner of the SSHRC Top 25 Storytellers Award and IISS Graduate Scholar Award likely drew academic attention to the research; altmetrics of book chapter downloads [132] indicate awareness.	The dearth of academic literature on the research problem presented entry points for the project and opportunities to bring awareness to academic circles. Attendance at and participation in conferences increased the PI’s capacity to reach and influence academic audiences. The prestige that accompanies research awards likely drew additional attention to the research. The availability of the dissertation online facilitates researcher access. Contribution to the DSocSci book was opportunistic, but the PI’s efforts successfully leveraged the opportunity for further knowledge mobilization. Diversification of knowledge products and dissemination strategies appears to have facilitated researcher awareness. The PI did not fully leverage knowledge mobilization through academic peer-reviewed publications. Access to RRU library resources following graduation posed a significant barrier to publish. Other researchers who may find the research valuable may not be aware of the findings owing to inappropriate search terms.
RRU and UVic students learn from the PI’s research experiences Partially realized, clear project contribution	Interviews: Researchers had positive impressions of the guest lectures given by the PI, noting that learning objectives were fulfilled (e.g. shared international fieldwork experience, shared experience conducting qualitative research, gave insight on the development sector, etc.) and gaps addressed (e.g. provided examples of applied qualitative research, provided examples from the African context, etc.). Web media: The Centre for Global Studies’ website outlines the expectations of visiting fellows, which include teaching; the website contains the PI’s profile. Indicators: Invitations to guest lecture; invitation to join UVic’s Centre for Global Studies as a visiting research fellow.	The PI was invited to guest lecture by professors within their network, established either from a personal or working relationship. These invitations are indicative of the PI’s expertise. Informants based their impressions on course evaluations or conversations with former students; the former is not a reliable indicator owing to low response rates. The extent of guest lecture effects and subsequent changes in behaviour are unclear; for example, student interest in the international field may be inherent to the student or inspired by the guest lecture, professor, or other factors.
The PI supports Moshi organizations participating in the research Realized, clear project contribution	Documents: Activities (e.g. sharing findings, offering pro bono services) to support participants were built into the project design. Interviews: The PI shared findings at two stages of the project; former participants appreciated the second round of interviews where preliminary findings were shared, discussed, and validated; researchers commended this research practice; all former participants interviewed noted they had received the results from the PI at project end; external to the project, the PI supported Moshi organizations via pro bono consulting (e.g. organized focus groups, facilitated strategic planning sessions, other). Indicators: Other individuals and organizations approached the PI to participate in order to get access to the research results.	Supporting organizations in Moshi was both a personal and project objective. Intentional planning, adequate funding, PI’s commitment, and implementation of activities supported the fulfillment of this objective. The PI’s communication of planned reciprocity to potential participants was clear and attractive to organizations. Unexpectedly, information about the PI’s planned reciprocity spread through participants’ networks to attract and incentivize participation to other individuals and organizations working in PDA in Moshi. Organizations in Moshi were both interested and open to improving their practices.
The PI built trust with participating organizations Realized, clear project contribution	Documents: Building and maintaining trust was reflected in project documentation and the dissertation; commitment to maintain anonymity was explicitly documented. Interviews: A couple informants reflected on the PI’s commitment to anonymity as a factor of trust in the project; most former participants reflected positively on how the PI shared findings (during second round of interviews, at project end); one researcher believed the validation and feedback approach used in the second round of interviews supported trust, agency, and ownership over the findings; former participants appreciated the discussion-like interview style, which made the PI come across as personable, relatable, and trustworthy. Indicators: Individuals and organizations were willing to participate in the project; evaluation informants were willing to participate in the evaluation at the PI’s request.	The PI planned and implemented strategies to support trust-building with participants. The personality, openness, and professionalism of the PI supported inter-personal trust and trust in the project. Organizations’ openness and willingness to participate in the project enabled trust to form (applicable to both ‘thriving’ and ‘floundering’ organizations).
The PI built relationships with participating organizations Realized, clear project contribution	Documents: The PI was aware of being an outsider and the importance of building relationships; PI’s intentions for anonymity, the interview approach, extended fieldwork periods, and periodic communication were explicitly documented. Interviews: Former participants and researchers discussed how the interview approach fostered trust and connection between the PI and participants (e.g. collected data valuable to participants, in-person interview discussions); offer of pro bono services as a form of professional relationship-building; PI visited the community multiple times and spent over ten months in Moshi; PI maintained periodic communication with participants during, at project end, and post-project; former participants described the PI as personable and relatable. Indicators: Strategies for trust-building (e.g. protecting participant anonymity, sharing findings) align with relationship-building strategies.	Being an outside researcher and other aspects of positionality could have acted as barriers to the PI’s relationship-building and overall project; however, neither appears to have played a significant role. The PI’s personality and nature were facilitating factors, though it is evident the PI also put effort into building relationships (interview approach, pro bono services, communication, maintaining anonymity, sharing findings). Some participants got connected with the PI through mutual friends or other pre-existing relationships.
Participating organizations change approach based on preliminary findings/ lessons from the research Partially realized, clear project contribution	Interviews: The findings predominantly prompted reflection on current organizational practices for former participants; actions by participating organizations in response to the findings include: reassessment of practices, a change in project proposal or reporting protocol (added question about unintended consequences of project activities), and planning for the future leadership of the organization; one former participant was unsure if changes had taken place in the organization, but had themselves taken up the findings and used them when they moved to a different organization; for most former participant informants, the findings affirmed the direction of their organization and the effectiveness of current approaches; some informants found the findings valuable but did not believe any major changes in their organization were catalyzed as a result; three former participants were unsure if practices had changed; two former participants noted that the findings had no direct influence on their organizations’ practices.	The structure of the research process (conversational interviews, follow-up interviews to share preliminary findings), the lessons presented in the findings, and the PI’s ongoing contact and relationships with project participants all contributed to changes in awareness, reflective practices, and new actions taken by participating organizations. Whether informants interviewed were from ‘thriving’ or ‘floundering’ organizations would likely influence the degree or types of changes necessary for or observable within their organization. For example, ‘thriving’ organizations would logically have little to change or have a pre-existing orientation toward reflexivity; hence, the predominance of responses indicating the findings affirmed organizations’ current practices. Informants willing to participate in the evaluation may also predominantly come from ‘thriving’ organizations, though this information was not disclosed to the evaluators. Changes that result from conversations and reflections on practice happen naturally within and between organizations.
The PI has enhanced personal knowledge/ insights on PDA and proposal writing skills to apply in consulting work Realized, clear project contribution	Documents: The PI’s intention to apply learning and insights into their professional consulting was documented in their proposal and dissertation. Interviews: Most practitioner informants and some researchers had the impression that the PI shares insights from their doctoral experience via their consulting with organizations and conferences; practitioners shared their awareness or evidence of how the PI’s insight-enhanced consulting has helped six PDA organizations in Tanzania, Canada, the United States, and beyond; informants identified a variety of skills and enhanced insights that the PI now brings to their consulting work, including facilitation skills, diverse PDA perspectives, academic and analytical thinking, organizational governance and management, leadership, monitoring and evaluation, and cultural and contextual awareness. Two informants described the PI as a valuable asset to their organization’s professional network.	Gaining applicable insight and skills were explicit goals for the PI in terms of their professional growth since they began their doctoral experience. Most practitioners and some researchers linked these gains directly to the doctoral process and experience. The PI’s role as a professional consultant to PDA organizations enables the PI to apply and transfer their personal knowledge and enhanced skills to their consulting and the organizations they work with and through. The PI identified the openness of participating organizations as an important factor that supported the enhancement of their knowledge and insights on PDA. The PI’s pre-doctoral consulting experiences and insights may have already equipped the PI with enhanced PDA knowledge, which may have been complemented by the PI’s doctoral research. The PI has an intrinsic orientation to continuous and lifelong learning, such that they will build on and apply their knowledge from every experience they have.
The PI mentors other DSocSci students Realized, indirect project contribution	Interviews: Informants attested to the opportunity for the PI to mentor another DSocSci candidate through RRU; the mentorship included application, coursework, and research committee advice; the PI and the mentee met periodically during their programs, and fostered a deeper friendship which evolved into a professional working partnership at the mentee’s organization; one researcher felt that the PI made a positive contribution to the DSocSci program as a whole.	The opportunity to mentor another DSocSci student was by chance, but fostered a serendipitous professional partnership between the mentor and mentee. Factors that facilitated this relationship included similar interests and backgrounds in development, working in Africa, and sharing the same supervisor.
Transform International collaboration Realized, clear project contribution	Interviews: Several informants were aware of the PI’s involvement with TI; practitioners from TI commented on the teamwork between the PI and other TI staff, the complementarity of skills each member brings to the collaboration, and highlighted the PI’s knowledge on organizational management; several practitioner and researcher informants discussed how the PI has applied their knowledge and approach from their doctoral research into the TI collaboration.	Collaborating with TI was an unexpected outcome. The TI collaboration emerged from the PI’s relationship with the DSocSci mentee, where upon connecting over their shared interests and professional backgrounds uncovered further parallels between each of their respective doctoral research projects and TI’s objectives. It is evident that the PI shares many of the same values as other TI staff, including passion about development, appreciation of learning, and valuing of each others’ strengths. TI is a collaboration-oriented organization owing to its mission and operating structure.
The PI gains professional capacity and recognition as PDA expert Realized, clear project contribution	Interviews: Informants described the PI as a ‘bridge’ between scholars and practitioners who is able to apply both their academic and professional expertise to their work; a few practitioners view the PI as an effective partner who brings valuable perspectives, skills, and contributions to their working partnership; one practitioner felt their organization had an ‘edge’ over other organizations because of the PI; one practitioner would collaborate with the PI on any project; several practitioners and researchers had the impression that the PI expanded their expertise as a result of the research, and gained recognition amongst organizations in Moshi during the research process. Indicators: The accreditation of a doctorate is widely recognized as an indicator of expertise; the PI was awarded prestigious scholarships and awards for their research (e.g. Mitacs Fellowship, SSHRC Fellowship, Top 25 Finalist Storytellers Award, Graduate Scholar Award); the PI received invitations to contribute to a book chapter and professional magazine, facilitate conferences, become a visiting scholar at UVic, guest lecture at UVic and RRU; following the research, the PI has joined new collaborations in leadership positions (i.e. joined the board)	Acquiring the accreditation of a doctorate was one of the PI’s aims in pursuing their research. The PI also intended to expand their consulting expertise to include research, as the DSocSci experience would build their research capacities. Some informants believed that the PI was already a PDA expert prior to joining the DSocSci program, and had years of extensive professional experience as a practitioner

Results	Illustrative evidence
Outcome assessment	Summary of supporting evidence for the assessment	Contextual factors and causal mechanisms affecting how the outcome was realized
Other researchers become aware of the researchRealized, clear project contribution	Documents: The proposal outlines the PI’s intention and strategies to reach academic audiences; presenting at conferences was an influential avenue to network and share findings with other researchers, and the feedback received from interdisciplinary researchers was positive; the SSHRC Storyteller Showcase required a short video summarizing the research to facilitate further awareness-building; the PI’s chapter contribution to the DSocSci book and promotion of the book could have spread awareness of the research.Web media: The dissertation is available online, via the RRU library repository for research and the PI’s website, making the research easily accessible; this website also hosts a blog, which shares reflections on the research experience and findings.Interviews: Researchers within the PI’s sphere of influence were aware of the project context and its findings.Indicators: The PI attended and presented at five conferences targeted to academic audiences; once available online, the PI received an immediate request to use the findings; being an award winner of the SSHRC Top 25 Storytellers Award and IISS Graduate Scholar Award likely drew academic attention to the research; altmetrics of book chapter downloads [132] indicate awareness.	The dearth of academic literature on the research problem presented entry points for the project and opportunities to bring awareness to academic circles. Attendance at and participation in conferences increased the PI’s capacity to reach and influence academic audiences. The prestige that accompanies research awards likely drew additional attention to the research. The availability of the dissertation online facilitates researcher access. Contribution to the DSocSci book was opportunistic, but the PI’s efforts successfully leveraged the opportunity for further knowledge mobilization. Diversification of knowledge products and dissemination strategies appears to have facilitated researcher awareness. The PI did not fully leverage knowledge mobilization through academic peer-reviewed publications. Access to RRU library resources following graduation posed a significant barrier to publish. Other researchers who may find the research valuable may not be aware of the findings owing to inappropriate search terms.
RRU and UVic students learn from the PI’s research experiencesPartially realized, clear project contribution	Interviews: Researchers had positive impressions of the guest lectures given by the PI, noting that learning objectives were fulfilled (e.g. shared international fieldwork experience, shared experience conducting qualitative research, gave insight on the development sector, etc.) and gaps addressed (e.g. provided examples of applied qualitative research, provided examples from the African context, etc.).Web media: The Centre for Global Studies’ website outlines the expectations of visiting fellows, which include teaching; the website contains the PI’s profile.Indicators: Invitations to guest lecture; invitation to join UVic’s Centre for Global Studies as a visiting research fellow.	The PI was invited to guest lecture by professors within their network, established either from a personal or working relationship. These invitations are indicative of the PI’s expertise. Informants based their impressions on course evaluations or conversations with former students; the former is not a reliable indicator owing to low response rates. The extent of guest lecture effects and subsequent changes in behaviour are unclear; for example, student interest in the international field may be inherent to the student or inspired by the guest lecture, professor, or other factors.
The PI supports Moshi organizations participating in the researchRealized, clear project contribution	Documents: Activities (e.g. sharing findings, offering pro bono services) to support participants were built into the project design.Interviews: The PI shared findings at two stages of the project; former participants appreciated the second round of interviews where preliminary findings were shared, discussed, and validated; researchers commended this research practice; all former participants interviewed noted they had received the results from the PI at project end; external to the project, the PI supported Moshi organizations via pro bono consulting (e.g. organized focus groups, facilitated strategic planning sessions, other).Indicators: Other individuals and organizations approached the PI to participate in order to get access to the research results.	Supporting organizations in Moshi was both a personal and project objective. Intentional planning, adequate funding, PI’s commitment, and implementation of activities supported the fulfillment of this objective. The PI’s communication of planned reciprocity to potential participants was clear and attractive to organizations. Unexpectedly, information about the PI’s planned reciprocity spread through participants’ networks to attract and incentivize participation to other individuals and organizations working in PDA in Moshi. Organizations in Moshi were both interested and open to improving their practices.
The PI built trust with participating organizationsRealized, clear project contribution	Documents: Building and maintaining trust was reflected in project documentation and the dissertation; commitment to maintain anonymity was explicitly documented.Interviews: A couple informants reflected on the PI’s commitment to anonymity as a factor of trust in the project; most former participants reflected positively on how the PI shared findings (during second round of interviews, at project end); one researcher believed the validation and feedback approach used in the second round of interviews supported trust, agency, and ownership over the findings; former participants appreciated the discussion-like interview style, which made the PI come across as personable, relatable, and trustworthy.Indicators: Individuals and organizations were willing to participate in the project; evaluation informants were willing to participate in the evaluation at the PI’s request.	The PI planned and implemented strategies to support trust-building with participants. The personality, openness, and professionalism of the PI supported inter-personal trust and trust in the project. Organizations’ openness and willingness to participate in the project enabled trust to form (applicable to both ‘thriving’ and ‘floundering’ organizations).
The PI built relationships with participating organizationsRealized, clear project contribution	Documents: The PI was aware of being an outsider and the importance of building relationships; PI’s intentions for anonymity, the interview approach, extended fieldwork periods, and periodic communication were explicitly documented.Interviews: Former participants and researchers discussed how the interview approach fostered trust and connection between the PI and participants (e.g. collected data valuable to participants, in-person interview discussions); offer of pro bono services as a form of professional relationship-building; PI visited the community multiple times and spent over ten months in Moshi; PI maintained periodic communication with participants during, at project end, and post-project; former participants described the PI as personable and relatable.Indicators: Strategies for trust-building (e.g. protecting participant anonymity, sharing findings) align with relationship-building strategies.	Being an outside researcher and other aspects of positionality could have acted as barriers to the PI’s relationship-building and overall project; however, neither appears to have played a significant role. The PI’s personality and nature were facilitating factors, though it is evident the PI also put effort into building relationships (interview approach, pro bono services, communication, maintaining anonymity, sharing findings). Some participants got connected with the PI through mutual friends or other pre-existing relationships.
Participating organizations change approach based on preliminary findings/ lessons from the researchPartially realized, clear project contribution	Interviews: The findings predominantly prompted reflection on current organizational practices for former participants; actions by participating organizations in response to the findings include: reassessment of practices, a change in project proposal or reporting protocol (added question about unintended consequences of project activities), and planning for the future leadership of the organization; one former participant was unsure if changes had taken place in the organization, but had themselves taken up the findings and used them when they moved to a different organization; for most former participant informants, the findings affirmed the direction of their organization and the effectiveness of current approaches; some informants found the findings valuable but did not believe any major changes in their organization were catalyzed as a result; three former participants were unsure if practices had changed; two former participants noted that the findings had no direct influence on their organizations’ practices.	The structure of the research process (conversational interviews, follow-up interviews to share preliminary findings), the lessons presented in the findings, and the PI’s ongoing contact and relationships with project participants all contributed to changes in awareness, reflective practices, and new actions taken by participating organizations.Whether informants interviewed were from ‘thriving’ or ‘floundering’ organizations would likely influence the degree or types of changes necessary for or observable within their organization. For example, ‘thriving’ organizations would logically have little to change or have a pre-existing orientation toward reflexivity; hence, the predominance of responses indicating the findings affirmed organizations’ current practices. Informants willing to participate in the evaluation may also predominantly come from ‘thriving’ organizations, though this information was not disclosed to the evaluators. Changes that result from conversations and reflections on practice happen naturally within and between organizations.
The PI has enhanced personal knowledge/ insights on PDA and proposal writing skills to apply in consulting workRealized, clear project contribution	Documents: The PI’s intention to apply learning and insights into their professional consulting was documented in their proposal and dissertation.Interviews: Most practitioner informants and some researchers had the impression that the PI shares insights from their doctoral experience via their consulting with organizations and conferences; practitioners shared their awareness or evidence of how the PI’s insight-enhanced consulting has helped six PDA organizations in Tanzania, Canada, the United States, and beyond; informants identified a variety of skills and enhanced insights that the PI now brings to their consulting work, including facilitation skills, diverse PDA perspectives, academic and analytical thinking, organizational governance and management, leadership, monitoring and evaluation, and cultural and contextual awareness. Two informants described the PI as a valuable asset to their organization’s professional network.	Gaining applicable insight and skills were explicit goals for the PI in terms of their professional growth since they began their doctoral experience. Most practitioners and some researchers linked these gains directly to the doctoral process and experience. The PI’s role as a professional consultant to PDA organizations enables the PI to apply and transfer their personal knowledge and enhanced skills to their consulting and the organizations they work with and through. The PI identified the openness of participating organizations as an important factor that supported the enhancement of their knowledge and insights on PDA.The PI’s pre-doctoral consulting experiences and insights may have already equipped the PI with enhanced PDA knowledge, which may have been complemented by the PI’s doctoral research. The PI has an intrinsic orientation to continuous and lifelong learning, such that they will build on and apply their knowledge from every experience they have.
The PI mentors other DSocSci studentsRealized, indirect project contribution	Interviews: Informants attested to the opportunity for the PI to mentor another DSocSci candidate through RRU; the mentorship included application, coursework, and research committee advice; the PI and the mentee met periodically during their programs, and fostered a deeper friendship which evolved into a professional working partnership at the mentee’s organization; one researcher felt that the PI made a positive contribution to the DSocSci program as a whole.	The opportunity to mentor another DSocSci student was by chance, but fostered a serendipitous professional partnership between the mentor and mentee. Factors that facilitated this relationship included similar interests and backgrounds in development, working in Africa, and sharing the same supervisor.
Transform International collaborationRealized, clear project contribution	Interviews: Several informants were aware of the PI’s involvement with TI; practitioners from TI commented on the teamwork between the PI and other TI staff, the complementarity of skills each member brings to the collaboration, and highlighted the PI’s knowledge on organizational management; several practitioner and researcher informants discussed how the PI has applied their knowledge and approach from their doctoral research into the TI collaboration.	Collaborating with TI was an unexpected outcome. The TI collaboration emerged from the PI’s relationship with the DSocSci mentee, where upon connecting over their shared interests and professional backgrounds uncovered further parallels between each of their respective doctoral research projects and TI’s objectives. It is evident that the PI shares many of the same values as other TI staff, including passion about development, appreciation of learning, and valuing of each others’ strengths. TI is a collaboration-oriented organization owing to its mission and operating structure.
The PI gains professional capacity and recognition as PDA expertRealized, clear project contribution	Interviews: Informants described the PI as a ‘bridge’ between scholars and practitioners who is able to apply both their academic and professional expertise to their work; a few practitioners view the PI as an effective partner who brings valuable perspectives, skills, and contributions to their working partnership; one practitioner felt their organization had an ‘edge’ over other organizations because of the PI; one practitioner would collaborate with the PI on any project; several practitioners and researchers had the impression that the PI expanded their expertise as a result of the research, and gained recognition amongst organizations in Moshi during the research process.Indicators: The accreditation of a doctorate is widely recognized as an indicator of expertise; the PI was awarded prestigious scholarships and awards for their research (e.g. Mitacs Fellowship, SSHRC Fellowship, Top 25 Finalist Storytellers Award, Graduate Scholar Award); the PI received invitations to contribute to a book chapter and professional magazine, facilitate conferences, become a visiting scholar at UVic, guest lecture at UVic and RRU; following the research, the PI has joined new collaborations in leadership positions (i.e. joined the board)	Acquiring the accreditation of a doctorate was one of the PI’s aims in pursuing their research. The PI also intended to expand their consulting expertise to include research, as the DSocSci experience would build their research capacities.Some informants believed that the PI was already a PDA expert prior to joining the DSocSci program, and had years of extensive professional experience as a practitioner