IPDET

Module 14:
Evaluation Ethics, Politics,
Standards, and Guiding
Principles
Ethics
Politics
Standards
Guiding
Principles
 Introduction
• Ethical Behavior
• Politics and Evaluation
• Evaluation Standards and Guiding
Principles

IPDET 22
 Ethics
• A set of values and beliefs that guide
choices
• Ethics are complicated, no laws or
standards can cover every possible
situation
– behavior can be legal, but unethical

IPDET 33
 Identifying Ethical
Problems
• Survey of AEA identified these problems:
– pressure by stakeholders to alter findings
– before evaluation, stakeholder has already
decided what “should be”
– findings suppressed or ignored by stakeholder
– evaluator reluctant to present findings fully
– evaluator discovers illegal, unethical, behavior
– evaluator unsure of ability to be objective
– evaluator is concerned about reporting findings
(continued on next slide)

IPDET 44
 Identifying Ethical
Problems (cont.)
• Survey of AEA identified these problems:
– evaluator pressured by stakeholder to violate
confidentiality
– misuses of findings by stakeholder
– findings are used to punish someone
– findings are deliberately modified by stakeholder
prior to release
– stakeholder declares certain research questions
“off limits”
– legitimate stakeholders are omitted from the
planning process
IPDET 55
 Ethics Issues
• To be useful, the work must be honest,
objective, and fair
• Difference between subtle influence and
bribe
• “Do No Harm”
• Maintain a written record of your
findings and reactions, separate from
evaluation material
IPDET 66
 Politics
• Politics as it refers to behavior that
occurs when conflict is perceived to
exist by at least one party in a
relationship
• Politics can undermine integrity of an
evaluation

IPDET 77
 Causes of Politics
• Too much room for subjectivity in the
following questions:
– What is the purpose of the evaluation?
– What will be considered a success or
failure?
– So what? How will the information be used
in subsequent decision making?
(continued on next slide)

IPDET 88
 Causes of Politics (cont.)
• Technical weaknesses
– difficult to agree on what to measure, difficult to
focus
– measuring one level but generalizing about
another
• Human weaknesses
– Look Good Avoid Blame (LGAB)
– Subjective Interpretation of Reality (SIR)
– trust factors

IPDET 99
 Political Games by Evaluatees
at Beginning
• Denying the need for evaluation
• Claiming the evaluation will take too much
time away from their normal workload
• Claiming evaluation is a a good thin, but
introducing delaying tactics
• Seeking to form close personal relationships
with the evaluator to convince the evaluator to
trust him or her

IPDET 10
10
 Political Games by Evaluatees
during Data Collection
• Omitting or distorting the information
they are asked to provide so they do not
look bad
• Giving the evaluator huge amounts of
information so they have difficulty
sorting out what is relevant and what is
not (snow job)

IPDET 11
11
 Political Games by Evaluatees
during Interpretation
• Denying the problem exists
• Downplaying the importance of the
problem or attributing it to others or
forces beyond their control
• Arguing that the information is now
irrelevant because things have changed

IPDET 12
12
 Political Games of
Stakeholders
• Similar to those of people being
evaluated
• May try to get media to criticize the
organization and tell how they should
have done the evaluation differently
• Giving own conclusions to meet their
agenda

IPDET 13
13
 Political Games by Evaluators
during Design
• Insisting evaluations be quantitative
(statistics don’t lie)
• Using the “experts know best” line
(evaluators do not trust those being
evaluated and want to have them be
“caught”

IPDET 14
14
 Political Games of Evaluators
during Data Collection
• Collecting information “off the record”
then allowing that information to enter
into the interpretation phase

IPDET 15
15
 Political Games by Evaluators
during Interpretation
• Not stating or shifting the measurement
standards
• Applying unstated criteria to decision
making
• Applying unstated values and
ideological filers to the data
interpretation
• Ignoring findings of evaluations
IPDET 16
16
 Managing Politics in
Evaluations
• Building trust
– takes time and many encounters
– keep all involved in the process responding
to and answering the important questions
• Building logic models
– all parties understand the underlying logic
so there is little room for misunderstanding

IPDET 17
17
 Balancing Stakeholders
with Negotiation
• Recognize political nature
• Value multiple stakeholder contributions
• Assess stakeholder positions
• Assure evaluator is an active player
within stakeholder community
• Develop negotiation skills
• Develop skills to manage conflict
IPDET 18
18
 Negotiation
• Initial stage
– positions put on the table
• Middle stage
– active negotiation
• Last stage
– steps are taken to reach concensus

IPDET 19
19
 Active Negotiation
• Empathy
– ability to see the world through the eyes of
the other
– express the empathy to the person (restate
what hear)
• Assertiveness
– ability to express and advocate for one’s
own needs, interests, and positions
– facilitator authority

IPDET 20
20
 Standards and Guiding Principles:
Two Prominent Codes

• Program Evaluation Standards

IPDET 21
21
 Program Evaluation
Standards Categories
• Utility
• Feasibility
• Propriety
– (8 sub-categories)
• Accuracy

IPDET 22
22
 8 Sub-categories of
Propriety
• Service orientation
• Formal agreements
• Rights of human subjects
• Human interactions
• Complete and fair assessment
• Disclosure of findings
• Conflict of interest
• Fiscal responsibility
IPDET 23
23
 Guiding Principles for
Evaluators
• Systematic inquiry
• Competence
• Integrity/honesty
• Respect for people
• Responsibilities for general and public
welfare

IPDET 24
24
 Other Standards and
Guiding Principles
• Australian Evaluation Society
• Swiss Evaluation Society
• German Society for Evaluation
• Italian Evaluation Association
• African Evaluation Association (draft)
• Others

IPDET 25
25
 Norms for Evaluation in
the UN system
• Evaluators must have personal and professional
integrity
• Evaluators must respect the right of institutions and
individuals to provide information in confidence and
ensure that sensitive data cannot be traced to its
source. Evaluators must take care that those involved
in evaluations have a chance to examine the
statements attributed to them.
• Evaluators must be sensitive to beliefs, manners, and
customs of the social and cultural environments in
which they work.
(continued on next slide)
IPDET 26
26
 Norms for Evaluation in
the UN system (cont.)
• In light of the United Nations Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, evaluators must be sensitive to and
address issues of discrimination and gender
inequality.
• Evaluations sometimes uncover evidence of
wrongdoing. Such cases must be reported discreetly
to the appropriate investigative body. Also, the
evaluators are not expected to evaluate the personal
performance of individuals and must balance an
evaluation of management functions with due
consideration for this principle.

IPDET 27
27
 UN Standards for Ethics
• Evaluators must have personal and professional
integrity.
• Evaluators must respect the right of institutions and
individuals to provide information in confidence and
ensure that sensitive data cannot be traced to its
source. Evaluators must take care that those involved
in evaluations have a chance to examine the
statements attributed to them.
• Evaluators must be sensitive to beliefs, manners, and
customs of the social and cultural environments in
which they work.
(continued on next slide)
IPDET 28
28
 UN Standards for Ethics
(cont.)

• In light of the United Nations Universal Declaration of

IPDET 29
29
To return to the
Table of Contents click here