Our methodology

The 22-point framework

Every country is examined against the same twenty-two points, in the same order. Some will be thin in some places, and where a point cannot be answered the page says so rather than quietly dropping it.

The eleven mission stages

A mission is not finished when the plane lands home. The last four stages are the ones most research stops short of, and they are the reason this project exists.

1. 01TravelGo, because there is a question worth investigating.
2. 02ObserveWatch the system running, on site, before judging it.
3. 03ResearchEstablish how it works, what it costs and who pays.
4. 04MeetReach the people who built it, run it and live with it.
5. 05DocumentRecord it on film, in photographs and in notes.
6. 06CompareSet it against what other places do, India included.
7. 07SharePublish it in both directions, with sources and limits.
8. 08AdaptWork out what another context would demand of it.
9. 09PilotTest the adapted model at small scale.
10. 10MeasureRecord the result against the baseline taken first.
11. 11ScaleExtend what held. Report what did not.

The five questions

Every practitioner is asked the same five, in the same order, whatever their role or country. Fixing the questions is what makes the answers comparable, and it stops an interview drifting into a profile of the person rather than the system.

1. 01What problem were you trying to solve?
2. 02What solution did you develop?
3. 03What made it work?
4. 04What challenges remain?
5. 05What could another country learn from your experience?

Question four does most of the work. People are generally willing to describe what is still wrong with something they built, and that answer is usually the one worth travelling for.

Six evidence tiers

A sourced government statistic and something an interviewee believes are two different claims on a reader trust. They are labelled differently everywhere they appear, and the content system refuses to publish a claim that does not meet the obligations of its tier.

• FACTVerified fact

  Published by a named source, with date and link. Check it yourself.

• OBSERVEDField observation

  Seen and recorded by Circular Journey during a research visit.

• OPINIONExpert opinion

  The view of a named individual, not a finding of this research.

• ANALYSISCircular Journey analysis

  Our own interpretation, drawn from the evidence cited alongside it.

• PROPOSALIndia adaptation idea

  A proposal for Indian conditions. Untested until a pilot says otherwise.

• GOALFuture vision

  A stated intention for a future year. Not a description of today.

Sourcing rules

• Cite the publisher, not the outlet that reported them.
• Record the date of the source, not the date it was found.
• Record when the link was last checked, so a dead link can be dated.
• Where the publisher states a limit on a figure, carry that limit with the figure. A statistic without its caveat is a statistic being misused.
• Never present a modelled projection as a measurement.
• Where two credible sources disagree, show both and say so.

Consent and privacy

• No organization is listed publicly without its agreement.
• No individual is named, photographed or quoted without their consent, recorded at the time.
• Facility photography and filming require permission from the operator, obtained in advance and confirmed on site.
• Logistical details an organization or a host shares with us, including any accommodation or transport help, are administrative and are never published. A host's home, family and address are never published at all.
• Consent can be withdrawn. If it is, the material comes down.

Limits of this method

Worth stating plainly, because every method has them and hiding them is what makes research untrustworthy.

• A visit is a snapshot.

  A few days at a facility shows how it ran that week. Seasonal variation, staff changes and the state of the equipment all move, and a single visit cannot capture that.

• Access is self-selecting.

  Organizations that agree to be visited are more likely to be proud of their system. We will keep asking to see the ones that closed, but the sample is skewed and will stay skewed.

• Language and interpretation.

  Most interviews will be conducted through an interpreter or in a second language. Nuance is lost, and transcripts are published so a reader can judge for themselves.

• One perspective.

  This is a small initiative, not a research institute with a review board. Findings are our reading of what we saw, labelled as analysis and open to being corrected.

If you spot an error in anything published here, please tell us and it will be corrected on the page with a note saying what changed.