Whether we view President Yudhoyono as a failure or not depends on what criteria we use. If the criteria we use are unclear, the results of our evaluation will be open to multiple interpretations.
Hence, it is necessary to set up clear criteria by using the SMART approach - specific, measureable, attainable, realistic and timely. Our political elites have not used this SMART criteria approach appropriately in order to avoid claims about success or failure in completing tasks.
People, then watch "rubbish debates" on elites' achievements because there is no formal or agreed upon standard measuring tool. Nowadays, we see experts, members of the House of Representatives and the like use their own criteria to determine whether the government has been successful or not.
Without concerned parties committing to SMART criteria, I am convinced that attempting to determine success will be an effort in vain. In evaluation theory, we can only assess performance if we have already created targets and determined criteria. With this system, overlaps, discrepancies and errors reduced and kept to a minimal level.
Indeed, if a perfect evaluation system is not in place, we can fill in the gaps by evaluating the processes (the how) and the results (the what). How we evaluate both aspects (the how and the what) depend on which aspect we prioritize. In developed countries, they emphasize "the how" rather than "the what", in part because I think morality, ethics and norms are the main concern of civilized people.
Aries Musnandar
Malang, East Java
