01
Issue diagnosis
Detecting the early signals of a problem before it hardens into a crisis, and framing what is actually at stake.
AIM — Asfar Impact Methodology
The single framework Asfar applies to every issue it takes on, carrying it from an initial diagnosis to a measurable institutional impact across six stages, each resting on an internationally recognised method.
Asfar starts from a premise at odds with the prevailing practice of research centres: a study that never reaches the field is not finished, and producing knowledge is the first step on a longer path whose purpose is to change a situation rather than merely describe it.
From that premise the Foundation derives its own framework, AIM — Asfar Impact Methodology — applied to every issue it adopts, from the moment it is first observed through to measuring its effect after implementation.
AIM rests on the proposition that the distance between knowledge and decision is not a technical gap a memorandum or an executive summary can close. It is a methodological gap, and it needs different instruments at each stage: the tools of diagnosis are not the tools of analysis, and neither are the tools of design, delivery or measurement.
Stage by stage
From diagnosis to measured impact
02
Knowledge analysis
Mapping the links between an issue’s causes and its effects, so a remedy does not simply move the damage elsewhere.
03
Decision matrix
Testing the available options against several plausible futures rather than a single forecast.
04
Initiative design
Tying every proposed action logically to the outcome it is meant to produce, with the assumptions made explicit.
05
Institutional implementation
Running delivery against results rather than a list of activities, with a partner that holds the decision.
06
Impact measurement
Measuring the change that actually occurred, publishing it, and feeding what was learned back into the next file.
Instruments
The methods AIM rests on
| Stage | Name | Method | Function |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Issue diagnosis | Horizon Scanning | Detecting the early signals of a problem before it hardens into a crisis, and framing what is actually at stake. |
| 02 | Knowledge analysis | Systems Thinking | Mapping the links between an issue’s causes and its effects, so a remedy does not simply move the damage elsewhere. |
| 03 | Decision matrix | Scenario Planning | Testing the available options against several plausible futures rather than a single forecast. |
| 04 | Initiative design | Theory of Change | Tying every proposed action logically to the outcome it is meant to produce, with the assumptions made explicit. |
| 05 | Institutional implementation | Results-Based Management | Running delivery against results rather than a list of activities, with a partner that holds the decision. |
| 06 | Impact measurement | Impact Assessment & MEL | Measuring the change that actually occurred, publishing it, and feeding what was learned back into the next file. |
The thesis