There are ways of incorporating both types of change in a Logical Framework planning format. Indicators for a desired change at the goal or purpose level can be presented as a set of alternative routes to that end, rather than as a whole set of changes of all which are necessary. Theories can then be constructed in advance and reviewed later on as to which of these routes will generate the most desired change. There is a parellel here with how mutual fund managers manage their portfolio of investments. They allocate assets to different sectors of the economy based on their view of which sectors will generate the best returns in the current economic context. They rarely put all their money on one sector, because of the level of uncertaintly about the economy as a whole and the individual companies they are investing in. This strategy is then reviewed in the light of subsequent results.

The second method is particularly applicable to the output level of a Logical Framework. Here it make sense to move the focus of outputs away from the delivery of specific services to changes in the performance of each of the stages within an organisation's project management cycle (planning - implementation - evaluation). Attributes of each of the project cycle stages can include timeliness, cost and qualitative improvement in the process when compared to the previous iteration. Outputs achived in these terms are likely to be more replicable by the organisation involved. Information about the impact of what is planned and implemented should become available through the associated monitoring and evaluation procedures which are also a part of the organisation's developing project management capacity. (Projects here mean any bounded unit of activities with known costs).

Both of these new methods are scalable, that is they can applied to can be applied at any scale within development aid programmes, from relationships with local community groups to the relationship between country and regional programmes.(Posted 26/12/2001)