Here's my own evaluation, or part of it anyway, while listening to Dorothy's wise words: Looking at this methodology from the point of view of (a) local people (also called "beneficiaries"), (b) funders and (c) project managers, I see some problems. This is a fairly complex approach and tool. This means that (a) local people (beneficiaries / respondents) will understand less, (b) funders will face increased costs for implementing a methodology that presumably take longer time, and (c) project managers will not be happy with the extra work involved (I recall how the Bank's task managers tended to object to the social analysis methods that our groups wanted to implement - they talked about the increasingly longer "check list" of things they had to do.
Hi Lars, thanks for all the drinks :)
also the points about the need to keep all stakeholders engaged - especially as Mike mentioned those that tend to be marginalised. Often resources may not be more - just readjusted.