• Generally, an indicator should concretely specify what is to be measured.
• Indicators shall be SMART:[3]
• Specific: clear, simple, single items of information, targeted (What is changing? Who is changing?)
• Measurable: items can be reliably quantified. This is safeguarded by: using specific units of measurement (What will be measured?); referring to a baseline/benchmark of comparison; clearly define the word you use (e.g. “effective”, “appropriate”, “successful”)
• Attainable: data easily and cost-effectively gathered.
• Relevant: information relates to the different levels of results (see chain of results)
• Timely: data can be collected and analysed quickly enough to be useful in implementation management.
• Indicators should be reliable: Information is credible. Assumptions are clearly stated. There is a direct connection between the indicator and what you are trying to prove. Measuring the indicator is independent from who gathers information.
• Indicators should be attributable, i.e. measure changes that are clearly attributable to the specific peacebuilding initiative. It is good to ask yourself whether what the result would have occured without your engagement.
  

Example: A project aims to increase the political empowerment of women. A possible quantitative indicator would be: “Number of women elected parliamentarians in the next election.” while a qualitative indicator could be “increase in % in women parliamentarians’ belief that their voices are making a difference.” or “decrease in % of women’s perception that they are marginalised in decision-making.”[5]

• What do you want to learn about?
• How will you see whether the expected results actually occurred?

• Be specific and clear about your expected results.
• Identify the processes that you want to learn about, then think carefully how you will see and track the process.
• Think creatively about context and culture. Ask the people and partners you work with to help you develop indicators for the changes you are trying to promote.
• Consider carefully the timeframes of change.
• Be careful with nice phrases and jargon. Probe what is really going on.

• Objectives/expected results need to be defined as specific and attainable as possible.
• Articulate your theory(ies) of change. Knowing exactly how activities are supposed to be linked to results makes it possible to generate clear indicators.
• Keep an indicator bank (indicators that have been used before, by your or other organisations; borrow from other professions, e.g. public health)
• Make indicator development a continuous undertaking.

• Brainstorm all related things or dimensions that can be counted, measured, or sized.
• Ask yourself: How would we see that a result is obtained?
  
• Ask partners, local actors and stakeholders what they consider to be significant signals of change (participatory indicator development).
• Break issues (multidimensional concepts) into smaller components. E.g. Reconciliation can be broken down to the components mercy, justice, truth, and peace. Each of these components again is rather abstract and not directly measurable and therefore needs to be operationalised by finding indicators.
• Expand the use of proven social science methods for measuring qualitative factors of change (attitudes, opinions, perceptions…)
• When developing indicators, also keep in mind that sometimes your results - in particular the ones on output level - might already be observable and therefore might not need additional indicators.
  

• Keep focused: What do we need to know and what information will tell us what I need to know?
• If formulated objectives are not providing clarity, consider rewriting them.
• Once you have a couple of possible indicators, look for ways to make them increasingly simple.