In recent years, expectations for demonstrating the impact of public diplomacy programs have dramatically increased. Despite increased calls for enhanced monitoring and evaluation, what texts exist on the subject suggest the state of practice is grim. However, while the current debate is based mostly on practice reports, conceptual work from academics or anecdotal evidence, we are missing empirical insights on current views of monitoring and evaluation from practitioners. Such a practice-level perspective is central for better understanding factors that may actually drive or hamper performance evaluation in day-to-day public diplomacy work. The purpose of this paper is to update knowledge on the state of evaluation practice within public diplomacy from the perspectives of practitioners themselves.,This study assesses the state of evaluation in public diplomacy through qualitative interviews with public diplomacy officers working for the US Department of State – a method heretofore unused in studies of the topic. In total, 25 in-depth interviews were conducted with officers in Washington, DC and at posts around the world.,The interviews suggest that practitioners see evaluation as underfunded despite increased demands for accountability. Further, the results show a previously not discussed tension between diplomacy practitioners in Washington, DC and those in the field. Practitioners are also unclear about the goals of public diplomacy, which has implications for the enactment of targeted evaluations.,The research uncovers the perceptions of evaluation from the voices of those who must practice it, and elaborates on the common obstacles in the enactment of public diplomacy, the influence of multiple actors and stakeholders on evaluation practice, as well as the perceived goals of public diplomacy programming. No empirical research has considered the state of evaluation practice. Moreover, the study uses qualitative interview data from public diplomacy officers themselves, an under-used method in public diplomacy research. The findings provide insights that contribute to future public diplomacy strategy and performance management.

中文翻译：

---

公共外交评估的现状：美国国务院的见解

近年来，人们对展示公共外交计划的影响的期望大大提高了。尽管有越来越多的人呼吁加强监测和评估，但有关该主题的哪些文本表明，这种做法的状况严峻。但是，尽管当前的辩论主要基于实践报告，学者的概念性工作或轶事证据，但我们缺少从业人员对当前监测和评估观点的经验见解。这种实践水平的观点对于更好地理解可能实际驱动或妨碍日常公共外交工作绩效评估的因素至关重要。本文的目的是从从业者自身的角度更新有关公共外交中评估实践状态的知识。这项研究通过与美国国务院工作的公共外交官员进行定性访谈，评估了公共外交的评估状态，这是迄今为止该主题研究中未曾使用过的一种方法。总共对华盛顿特区和世界各地的官员进行了25次深度访谈。访谈表明，尽管对问责制的要求增加，从业人员仍认为评估资金不足。此外，结果表明华盛顿特区的外交从业人员与该领域的外交从业人员之间以前没有讨论过紧张关系。从业者还不清楚公共外交的目标，这对制定有针对性的评估有影响。该研究从必须实践评估的人们的声音中发现了评估的观念，并阐述了公共外交制定中的常见障碍，多个参与者和利益相关者对评估实践的影响以及公共外交规划的预期目标。没有实证研究考虑评估实践的状态。此外，该研究使用来自公共外交官本身的定性访谈数据，这是公共外交研究中未充分使用的方法。这些发现提供了有助于未来公共外交战略和绩效管理的见识。该研究使用来自公共外交官员本身的定性访谈数据，这是公共外交研究中未充分使用的方法。这些发现提供了有助于未来公共外交战略和绩效管理的见识。该研究使用来自公共外交官员本身的定性访谈数据，这是公共外交研究中未充分使用的方法。这些发现提供了有助于未来公共外交战略和绩效管理的见识。