I’m Kathleen Lis Dean from The Rucks Group, where we help teams connect the dots between data, people, and purpose. Across very different contexts, one lesson stands out: data alone doesn’t create change – people do.
Evaluation is more than gathering and reporting information; what matters is how teams interpret that information together. Organizational theorist Karl Weick called this process sensemaking –the way people interpret what’s happening and decide what it means. For evaluators, understanding sensemaking is essential. It helps us anticipate how findings will be understood, how learning unfolds in groups, and how evaluation can inform – not just document – the initiatives we support. When evaluation incorporates sensemaking, data become a foundation for shared learning, reflection, and action.
Lessons Learned: Why Sensemaking Matters
Weick described seven properties that shape how people make meaning from information. Each offers insight into how evaluators can support reflection, learning, and decision-making.
Identity – Who we are shapes what we see.
Stakeholders interpret findings through their roles and experiences. By inviting multiple perspectives, evaluators reveal a fuller picture of what data means and ensure insights resonate across the system.
Social – Meaning emerges collectively.
Sensemaking happens through dialogue. Evaluators can design spaces – workshops, meetings, and conversations – that surface assumptions and build shared understanding.
Retrospective – We make sense by looking back.
People understand the present by connecting it to the past. Reflection tools like timelines or incident maps help teams link past actions to current outcomes and guide future choices.
Cues – Certain data points capture attention.
A few vivid stories or metrics often shape interpretation. Evaluators can help teams notice why these stand out and balance them with other evidence.
Enactment – We shape the story through our questions.
The questions we ask influence what becomes meaningful. Thoughtful inquiry allows evaluators to guide learning, not just record results.
Plausibility – Coherent stories matter more than precision.
People act on findings that feel logical and useful. Evaluators can enhance use by presenting findings clearly and accessibly to support informed action.
Ongoing – Understanding evolves over time.
Learning continues beyond a report. Regular reflection and check-ins help teams adapt insights to new data and shifting contexts.
Together, these properties remind us that evaluation is about more than producing data—it’s about helping people make meaning and act on it. When evaluators attend to how sensemaking happens, we can better facilitate shared understanding and help teams learn and adapt with purpose.
Hot Tips & Rad Resources: Practical Tools for Sensemaking
At The Rucks Group, we integrate sensemaking into evaluation by using tools that foster reflection and collaboration throughout a project’s lifecycle:
- Team Orientation tools such as timelines, critical incident maps, and decision matrices help teams recall where they’ve been, anticipate what’s ahead, and align priorities during annual reflection and planning.
- Collaborative Tracking tools transform spreadsheets into living documents that support real-time data reflection, progress tracking, and team collaboration (sample collaborative tracking tool)
- Consensus Building tools, like emergent learning tables, guide teams through structured reflection and participatory decision-making, turning insights into coordinated action. One resource we recommend is Guide to the Principles of Emergent Learning (https://emergentlearning.org/publications/).
When we help teams create shared understanding, evaluation becomes more than a report – it becomes a pathway to learning, connection, and meaningful change. By embedding sensemaking into our evaluation practice, we help move teams from data to dialogue to decisions and, ultimately, toward collective learning that drives improvement.
The American Evaluation Association is hosting Theories of Evaluation TIG Week with our colleagues in the Theories of Evaluation Topical Interest Group. The contributions all this week to AEA365 come from our Theories of Evaluation TIG members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on theaea365 webpageso that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by theAmerican Evaluation Associationand provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.
This was such a great and timely post, and definitely helpful for clarifying sensemaking to anyone less familiar with it. Just wanted to share that colleagues and I just had an article published in the American Journal of Evaluation on 12/ about sensemaking and observation of team science competencies, so i thought I’d share that here: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10982140251383896