The Most Significant Change technique for community stories

What is the Most Significant Change technique?

The Most Significant Change (MSC) technique is a way to monitor and evaluate a programme using stories. It was developed by Rick Davies and Jess Dart. In their guide, they describe it as a participatory method in which stories of change are collected from those most directly involved, such as participants and field staff, and then reviewed and selected by panels of stakeholders at different levels.

MSC does not rely on predefined indicators. Instead of asking whether you reached a target, it asks what changes people think matter most. This helps you find unexpected results, understand what communities value and learn about your programme's real effects.

When should you use it?

MSC works well when:

• you want to capture changes that indicators miss, such as dignity, confidence or relationships;
• you want to involve participants and staff in deciding what success means;
• your work is complex and results vary from place to place;
• you need good material for learning conversations with staff and donors.

Do not use MSC as your only source of evidence, because it does not tell you how many people changed. Combine it with indicators and surveys. For a more structured method of tracing your contribution to change, see outcome harvesting.

What are the ten steps?

The guide describes ten steps for a full MSC process. The guide says that steps 4, 5 and 6 fundamentally define the process; the others are used depending on your context.

1. Start and raise interest. Introduce MSC to staff and partners. Find at least one champion who understands the method.
2. Define domains of change. Choose broad areas, such as "changes in people's lives" or "changes in women's participation". Keep them loose so participants can interpret them. Many teams add an open domain called "any other change".
3. Set the reporting period. Decide how often to collect stories. Monthly or quarterly collection with annual review is common.
4. Collect stories. Ask participants and field staff what they think was the most significant change and why. Record who, what, when, where and why it matters.
5. Select the most significant stories. Groups at each level read the stories, discuss them and choose the ones they think matter most. Record the reasons for the choice.
6. Feed back the results. Tell everyone which stories were chosen and why. This shapes the next round of story collection.
7. Verify stories. Check that the facts are accurate, especially before sharing with funders.
8. Quantify. Optionally add numbers within stories or check how common a type of change is.
9. Analyse stories together. Look across all stories, including those not selected, for patterns.
10. Revise the system. Learn from the process and improve it. Start with a pilot.

How do you collect good stories?

Collecting a story is a conversation. Use these points, drawn from the guide and a tools4dev review of it:

• Ask an open question within each domain, for example: "In the last quarter, what do you think was the most significant change in women taking part in village decisions?"
• Record the basics: a title, who was involved and when, what happened, and why the person thinks it is significant. The reason is especially important.
• Check the word "significant." The tools4dev review notes that the team should find the right translation in the local language. In some contexts, "important" works better. Test this in Burmese and in other languages your team uses.
• Get consent. Explain how the story will be used. Offer anonymity, and agree what to leave out.
• Take care with sensitive stories. Do not record details that could put the person or others at risk.

How do you run a selection meeting?

The selection step is where learning happens. The tools4dev review lists the key ingredients:

1. Everybody reads the stories before or during the meeting.
2. The group holds an in-depth conversation about which stories matter most and why.
3. The group chooses, often by voting.
4. The reasons for the choice are written down and attached to the story.

Set aside enough time. The review suggests about two hours per meeting. Stories are selected at field-team level first, then passed to the management team, who choose again. After feedback, field staff adjust what they look for in the next round.

Be aware that who is in the room shapes what is chosen. Include women and men, and different roles. Our guide on storytelling for NGOs without exploiting people covers ethical care in more depth.

How do you use the results?

• Share selected stories with staff, partners and funders, along with the reasons they were chosen.
• Verify stories that will be sent outside the organisation. A visit or a follow-up call can check facts and add detail.
• Use patterns to shape plans. If many stories mention safe spaces for women, that tells you something about what people value.
• Combine with other data. Put stories next to your indicator results in reports. See our guide on writing a case study about your work.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Collecting stories but skipping selection and feedback. Without steps 5 and 6, it is only a storytelling exercise.
• Not recording reasons. The reasons show your values and your learning.
• Choosing only success stories. Include negative or unexpected changes.
• Treating stories as proof of scale. Say how many people you know were affected.
• Neglecting consent and safety.

How EMPO can help

EMPO is a reliable, Myanmar-based training and consultancy provider and one of the country's leading names in practical NGO training, with 1,200+ people trained and 15 partner organisations. We offer MEAL and facilitation training, in English and Burmese, online and in person across Myanmar. See our training services or contact us to plan a session.

Sources

• The 'Most Significant Change' (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use — Rick Davies and Jess Dart, 2005