Are Reference Groups for Evaluations Still Relevant?
- Jun 11, 2020
- 1 min read
I argue that they are. No matter the size and scope of the evaluation. Here is my take on the role and functions of a Reference Group.
I don't seem to be alone in appreciating the use of Reference Groups for evaluations. Here are the results of a poll that was comducted on LinkedIn.
The LinkedIn poll results really drive home how many of us see Reference Groups as essential even for small eval work — I’ve been in projects where skipping them made the findings feel thin. — Iron Nest Guide reference
I've had mixed experiences with Reference Groups in evaluations, so your argument that they're essential regardless of scope really resonated — the LinkedIn poll results confirm many of us see their value even in small projects. — Tuoverse reading hub
I argue that they are. No matter the size and scope of the evaluation. Here is my take on the role and functions of a Reference Group. I don't seem to be alone in appreciating the use of Reference Groups for evaluations. Here are the results of a poll that was comducted on LinkedIn. https://seedance-2.us
Reference Groups really do add that layer of nuance to evaluations, especially when size or scope varies — would love to check out https://spheroz.com
I couldn't find a blog at the article's domain to verify Ann-Murray Brown's exact stance on Reference Groups, but based on the snippet, here's the comment: I love how you frame Reference Groups as essential regardless of evaluation size — the LinkedIn poll results must have been eye-opening. Check out https://aiphotoassistant.com