Evaluation and adjustment
Measuring the effects of actions against objectives, learning from gaps and redirecting the strategy: the stage that makes the approach truly iterative.
Who it is for
Campaign leadership, governing bodies and steering teams.
When
At regular intervals during the campaign, then at the final review and between elections.
Key deliverables
Periodic evaluation notes, adjustment recommendations, final review and lessons learned.
Learning continuously
No strategy survives contact with reality unchanged. Voters react differently from what was anticipated, opponents shift their positioning, unforeseen events upset the agenda. A campaign that does not measure its effects risks persisting in error until polling day.
Evaluation borrows from the methods of public policy evaluation: defining indicators in advance, collecting data regularly, analysing gaps between objectives and results, and identifying their causes. Where possible, controlled tests make it possible to measure the real effect of an action rather than assume it.
Gaps are not failures but information. They lead to revisiting the diagnosis’s assumptions and adjusting the design: this constant feedback loop is what turns a fixed plan into a living strategy.
What evaluation covers
Evaluation at several levels, from individual actions to the strategy as a whole.
Indicator tracking
Regular collection of the indicators defined during the design stage.
Gap analysis
Comparing targets with measured results and identifying causes.
Action evaluation
Measuring the relative effectiveness of different channels and arrangements.
Review of assumptions
Checking the validity of the diagnosis’s assumptions in light of the facts.
Recommendations
Prioritised adjustment proposals submitted to decision-makers.
Lessons learned
Capturing insights for future elections.
Measure, understand, adjust
A short, regular cycle focused on decision-making.
Measurement
Collecting and checking tracking data.
Analysis
Interpreting gaps and their causes.
Review
Strategic review session with decision-makers.
Adjustment
Redirecting priorities, message or resources.
Capture
Documenting lessons learned.
Explicit, verifiable methods
Every tool we use is documented: its sources, assumptions and limitations are known to our clients.
Logical evaluation framework
An explicit link between objectives, actions, indicators and means of verification.
Controlled tests
Comparing exposed and unexposed groups to measure the real effect of an action.
Periodic strategic review
Structured sessions for analysis and decision.
Structured lessons learned
A capture method distinguishing what worked, what failed and why.
Measuring honestly
Every indicator is labelled by status — target, calculated estimate or measured result — in line with our principles of rigour
| Indicator | What it shows | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Target vs result gap | The distance between what was aimed for and what was measured. | Measured result |
| Attributable effect | The specific impact of an action, where a test allows it to be isolated. | Calculated estimate |
| Reviews held | The regularity of strategic reviews planned in the calendar. | Target |
| Recommendations applied | The share of agreed adjustments actually implemented. | Measured result |
A sincere evaluation
A complacent evaluation is worse than none at all; we guarantee its sincerity.
No embellished figures
Results are presented as measured, with their status and source.
Clear status
Targets, estimates and measured results are never confused.
Cautious causality
We do not attribute to an action an effect the data cannot establish.
Right to be wrong
Acknowledging a failure quickly is the condition for correcting it.
A measured gap is not a failure: it is information that arrives in time.AXIOME working principle
In what contexts do we work?
Illustrative situations: they do not describe actual engagements.
Mid-campaign
A campaign wants to check that its actions are having the intended effects before the final stretch.
Mixed results
Some areas are progressing, others are stagnating; the reasons need to be understood.
After the election
A party wants to draw lessons from an election to prepare for the next.
Frequently asked questions
It depends on the intensity of the campaign: regular reviews during active phases, and an in-depth review at the end of the election.
Through controlled tests where possible, comparing exposed and unexposed groups. Otherwise, conclusions are presented with caution.
They are handed to the client and form a valuable basis for future elections, particularly for the next diagnosis.
Related expertise
Let's discuss your project
Every political context is unique. A first, strictly confidential conversation allows us to understand what is at stake and define the most relevant support.
