Utvärderingens tidevarv: En diskursanalytisk studie av utvärdering i Göteborgs stads kommunikationsverksamhet

Abstract

The purpose of this essay is to investigate the perceptions that exist about evaluation and the evaluation of communication in the public sector, and to clarify what role and function evaluations are perceived to have. The study seeks to answer questions about how evaluation is described in the City of Gothenburg’s documents and by the city’s communication practitioners, as well as how they describe why and how communication is evaluated. A discourse analysis is applied to a material consisting of nine semi-structured interviews with communication practitioners and documents in the form of guidelines and a report. A theoretical framework consisting of Scandinavian institutionalism with legitimacy and isomorphism as core concepts is used to analyze and discuss the results. Results indicate that there are three main discourses revolving evaluation in the material. Evaluation is connected to an instrumental discourse, where evaluation is talked about as a tool for measuring numbers, effects and results. A learning discourse highlights the use of evaluation for learning and developing communication. In a discourse of professional legitimacy, the communication practitioners talk about evaluation as a method for showing the worth of their profession, which has been publicly scrutinized in the past years. Results indicate that there is an ambition among the communication practitioners to conduct deeper analysis in evaluations, but due to lack of time, they often measure simpler quantitative indicators. The results also indicate that in a time when communication practitioners are questioned in the public debate, especially in the City of Gothenburg, evaluations also have a legitimizing function. By evaluating the results and benefits of communication, communicators hope to demonstrate their value to the outside world.