The Guiding Principles of the Polish Evaluation Society (PTE) are axiological and ethical guidelines concerning the activities and behaviors of its members. These principles are intended to serve as a guide for the professional conduct of evaluators at all stages of the evaluation process: from the initial discussion about the subject and purpose through the design and implementation of the research to the reporting and use of results. At the same time, these principles should be used for commissioners and stakeholders to communicate and clarify ethical issues related to conducted evaluations. The Guiding Principles reflect the fundamental values adopted, practiced, and promoted by the PTE, as well as by individual evaluators, which define evaluation as a system of social activities. The axiology of the PTE is based on four pillars.
The first pillar of the PTE’s axiology comprises values encompassing citizens’ rights and well-being. This pillar includes the right to freedom, security, and equality, as well as rights concerning citizens’ welfare and their right to improve their circumstances. Significant components of this group of values are the autonomy of citizens and society and their socio-political participation. For this reason, evaluation becomes a value that transcends the individual, built with respect for social ethics. The first pillar of the PTE’s axiology also includes concepts of respect, privacy, confidentiality, and protection from harm and threats.
The key value of the second pillar of our Society’s axiology is responsibility toward evaluation stakeholders, Polish society, and the international community. This pillar prioritizes the common good and social justice. It also includes values such as democratic foundational principles, collective decision-making, rationality, the dignity of evaluation participants, sustainable development, pro-development, and modernity. The second pillar also supports the pursuit of truth, honesty, transparency, credibility, sincerity, and authenticity.
The third pillar is based on professionalism, grounded in high substantive competencies, independent thinking, and fair conduct, including the open presentation of the values upheld. Professionalism also regards social competencies, including relationships with other individuals, groups, and organizations.
The fourth pillar encompasses values related to evaluation as a system of social actions, which constitutes an indispensable component of the developmental potential of societies and a significant factor in fostering their collective and individual well-being.
This pillar includes values such as social integration, the development and dissemination of negotiation and agreement practices in social life that eliminate practices based on coercion or violence, the promotion and consolidation of interpersonal relationships based on mutual understanding and respect, the creation of conditions for interactions based on trust, and respect for people’s right to make their own choices.
The axiology adopted by the PTE is associated with the principles guiding PTE members’ evaluation activities. These principles are:
1. Credibility
2. Integrity
3. Decency
4. Respect for people
5. Independence
6. Transparency
7. Responsibility for the public welfare
8. Professionalism
9. Systemic and methodical approach in the evaluation process
10. Dialogical approach
11. Quality and accuracy requirements
12. Utility
13. Efficiency
14. Proper management
The Guiding Principles constitute a coherent system and should not be applied selectively in evaluation activities.
- 1. Credibility
1.1. The credibility of the evaluation is ensured through the use of methodologically sound research procedures, reliability, and honesty in conducting the evaluation.
1.2. Evaluators should respect the principles of impartial conduct throughout the evaluation process, including various cultural contexts.
1.3. Individuals conducting evaluations should be trustworthy and credible, thanks to their education, practical skills, and acquired experience.
1.4. In carrying out their tasks, the evaluator should be guided by worldview neutrality and impartiality.- 2. Integrity
2.1. The evaluator should adhere to the principle of integrity at every evaluation stage.
2.2. An important aspect of the evaluator’s integrity is conducting the evaluation process diligently: the evaluator should access all information necessary for properly conducting the study, promptly inform of any changes to the initially agreed evaluation plan, present the rationale for such changes and their potential impact on the scope and results of the evaluation, and fulfill the obligation to present the findings of the study accurately and truthfully.
2.3. The evaluator should communicate honestly and factually with the commissioner and stakeholders regarding all aspects of the evaluation, presenting procedures, data, and findings, including limitations and risks that could generate misleading information or conclusions. If these risks cannot be eliminated, modifying or discontinuing the evaluation may be necessary.
2.4. The evaluator should identify the values, differences in perspectives, and interests of stakeholders, commissioners, and evaluators concerning the course and results of the evaluation. The evaluator should also disclose any conflicts of interest and counteract their negative impact on the evaluation findings and conclusions.- 3. Decency
3.1. In conducting evaluations, the principle of decency must be obeyed, and procedures and communication must be applied to ensure adequacy to stakeholders’ needs, legitimacy, and fairness of evaluation activities. Care should be taken to protect the rights of individuals and the dignity of participants and other stakeholders, which should take precedence over the benefits derived from the information obtained.
3.2. When planning and conducting research, evaluators should identify and consider stakeholders’ needs and expectations and demonstrate sensitivity to their cultural diversity.
3.3. Evaluators should consider the well-being of all persons involved in the evaluation process and those interested in its results. Evaluation activities should maximize benefits and reduce unnecessary risks or harm to those involved in the process (“do no harm”).
3.4. Evaluators have an obligation to consider and protect the interests of those involved in the evaluation. Findings and conclusions from the evaluation study should be provided to all interested parties in user-friendly languages that consider their literacy and communication barriers unless this would violate legal regulations or standards of decency.
3.5. Evaluators should be familiar with and respect legal regulations, particularly those that govern their professional activities, may influence the course of research, or pertain to the rights of participants and stakeholders in the evaluation study.- 4. Respect for People
4.1. In their interactions with research participants and stakeholders, evaluators must conduct themselves responsibly and foster trust. They must also ensure that these individuals’ dignity, sensitivity, sense of security, and privacy are respected. At the same time, evaluators should recognize and appreciate the contributions and roles of participants and stakeholders in the evaluation, particularly concerning the time they invest, the goodwill they demonstrate, and the data, information, and insights they provide.
4.2. Evaluators should ensure that participation in the evaluation does not have a negative impact on the circumstances of its participants.
4.3. The evaluation should be conducted in a way that fosters mutual trust and respect, recognizing and honoring the diversity of participants regarding their race, ethnicity, gender, age, religion, cultural, political, and social beliefs, sexual orientation, and any specific needs.
4.4. Evaluators are responsible for ensuring the highest possible degree of confidentiality and anonymity for study participants.
4.5. Participation in the evaluation study should be based on voluntary and informed consent from the participants. The evaluator is obligated to explain the purpose of the study and how its results will be used. Participants should be informed of their right to withdraw from the study and of their rights under data protection regulations.- 5. Independence
5.1. Individuals conducting the evaluation must not accept any pressures that might undermine the independence and objectivity of the research process, nor should they permit situations where stakeholders or participants are intimidated in a manner that jeopardizes the integrity, credibility, legitimacy, and utility of the evaluation. It is the fundamental responsibility of evaluators to identify and prevent any attempts by individuals or interest groups to appropriate the evaluation process.
5.2. To ensure the evaluation’s independence, evaluators must agree with the commissioner, stakeholders, and study participants on the evaluation objectives, criteria, questions, and research methods. During this process, evaluators should clarify their ethical commitments to the commissioner, stakeholders, and study participants.
5.3. Evaluators should establish mutual commitments with commissioners in advance through a written agreement. Commissioners should be referred to the Guiding Principles of the Professional Standards for Evaluation (PTE) when appropriate. Evaluators must not accept any contractual terms, including financial arrangements, that undermine professional ethics, research autonomy, or the quality of the study.
5.4. The evaluation results, free from bias, are paramount to the independence of the evaluation study.- 6. Transparency
6.1. The principle of transparency in the evaluation process ensures that the study can be verified as having been conducted according to its stated objectives and assumptions and that it fairly considers the needs of stakeholders. This principle requires the comprehensive sharing of findings and conclusions, provided it does not breach any legal requirements or ethical norms.
6.2. The transparency principle requires that evaluations be designed, conducted, and documented so that all participants understand the objectives, methodology, process, results, and conclusions, as well as how these were derived. Additionally, it necessitates clarity regarding the values, principles, and assumptions underlying the evaluators’ reasoning and opinions.
6.3. The principle of transparency also requires that all participants in the evaluation process and the general public be adequately informed of the evaluation’s results. Furthermore, the evaluation study should enhance social knowledge among a broad audience.- 7. Responsibility for the Public Welfare
7.1. Evaluators respect the principle of responsibility for the public welfare in their professional activities.
7.2. In implementing this principle, evaluators should identify phenomena and address potential threats in situations contrary to the objectives of a democratic and just society, human rights, the agency and well-being of citizens, and environmental protection.
7.3. In their evaluative practice, evaluators should carefully discern and balance the commissioner’s particular interests with those of other stakeholders and the broader public interest.- 8. Professionalism
8.1. Evaluators should demonstrate the knowledge, skills, and experience necessary to conduct evaluations. An essential component of evaluative competence is an awareness of the ethical implications of the evaluation process, along with strong organizational and social skills abilities.
8.2. Evaluators should continuously update their evaluative competencies and expertise in their field of specialization while broadening their proficiency in the methods, techniques, and research skills necessary for conducting evaluations.
8.3. The continuous advancement of evaluators’ professionalism should encompass not only the enhancement of evaluative expertise and skills but also the dissemination of knowledge and the advocacy of evaluation practices. This includes fostering a culture of evaluation, responsibility, and ongoing learning.
8.4. For interdisciplinary evaluations, it is crucial to incorporate specialists from the specific disciplines relevant to the study into the evaluation team.- 9. Systemic and Methodical Approach in the Evaluation Process
9.1. The evaluation process is multifaceted, necessitating the maintenance of its integrity through the close interconnection of the actions undertaken and continuous reflection on the process’s implementation, results, and effects.
9.2. When conducting an evaluation, it is imperative to use a range of data verified to be accurate, dependable, credible, systematically collected, and directly relevant to the study’s objectives.
9.3. Conducting an evaluation requires developing a project timeline that provides ample opportunity for discussions on the research methodology, proposed questions, evaluation criteria, data collection, analysis, and reporting. The timeline should also allow sufficient time to review recommendations with pertinent stakeholders.
9.4. The evaluator must meticulously document the data collection and analysis process during the evaluation. The evaluator should also be prepared to provide stakeholders with updates on the progress of work at each stage.- 10. Dialogical Approach
10.1. When planning and conducting an evaluation, it is essential to consider social and cultural diversity, as well as the various perspectives and interests of individuals and groups relevant to the evaluation’s subject.
10.2. Stakeholders should be encouraged to actively participate throughout the entire evaluation process, particularly in developing the evaluation design and formulating evaluation criteria and questions. However, involving stakeholders in discussions about the evaluation results should not permit any interference that would compromise the integrity of the evaluation process.
10.3. It is crucial to consider the varied viewpoints of stakeholders during the evaluation process. This practice is intended to prevent potential misuse and inappropriate applications of the evaluation results.
10.4. The evaluation process should be viewed as a network of social activities. Actively engaging all relevant groups in this process can augment their accountability and impact on the decisions being made.- 11. Quality and accuracy requirements
11.1 The evaluation process should be conducted appropriately and accurately, guaranteed by applying specific procedures.
11.2 The quality and accuracy procedures that evaluators must follow should reflect the current state of knowledge in evaluation research methodology and legal considerations.
11.3 Requirements relating to the quality and accuracy of the evaluation should be formulated to ensure the research conclusions’ relevance, reliability, and objectivity.
11.4 Maintaining the appropriate quality of evaluation and accuracy of obtained results should characterize all stages of the evaluation process – from conceptualization through the research procedure to dissemination and use of conclusions and recommendations.
11.5 An essential element of ensuring the quality and accuracy of the evaluation process should be a comprehensible and empirically grounded justification of conclusions and recommendations. They should be formulated and presented unambiguously, reducing the risk of different interpretations among stakeholders.
11.6 Quality and accuracy refer both to the methods of collecting data and to their analysis. Efforts should be made to collect a wide range of empirical material – relevant to the study’s subject – and to include diverse sources of data, which should be meticulously verified.
11.7 Quality and accuracy requirements should ensure that the correctness of the research and analysis process can be reproduced and assessed.- 12. Utility
12.1 The principle of utility means planning and conducting an evaluation so that its stakeholders find the process and its results useful and relevant to their needs.
12.2 In the planning process and in developing the evaluation results, the widest possible participation of stakeholders should be allowed, their perspectives taken into account, and the quality of cooperation ensured. This mitigates the risk of being influenced by one-sided views or the interests of only a narrow group of people.
12.3 The evaluator should formulate clear and transparent messages. Evaluation reports (including conclusions and recommendations) and other products of the evaluation process should be understandable to their recipients. Effective communication increases the usefulness of evaluation results.
12.4 The evaluator should encourage practical use and wide dissemination of evaluation results by stakeholders involved in the evaluation process.- 13. Efficiency
13.1 The principle of efficiency is based on an optimal balance between the expected results of the evaluation and the resources that can be engaged. The principle of efficiency cannot be equated with reducing the evaluation process’s costs to ensure its correctness and appropriate quality.
13.2 This principle should also be understood as using resources involved in the evaluation proces to an extent adequate to the needs and assumed effects. This means avoiding excessive and insufficient use of financial, time, personnel, technical, and information resources.
13.3 The principle of efficiency requires that the evaluation be planned and conducted so that the agreed assumptions and objectives are achieved within the specified time frame using the available resources. This requires precise agreements between the evaluator and the commissioner.
13.4 The efficiency of the evaluation process should already be assessed at the planning stage, referring to the evaluator’s and other stakeholders’ resources. The effectiveness of the evaluation should be monitored at each stage of the process, and if the original assumptions are modified, the stakeholders should co-decide on appropriate corrective actions.
13.5 To ensure the effectiveness of the evaluation, the competencies of individual stakeholders should be taken into account while striving to avoid overburdening them with involvement in the evaluation process.
13.6 The principle of efficiency applies to any evaluation. This principle does not depend on whether private or public resources are involved in conducting the evaluation study. However, in the latter case—where the implementation of the evaluation process is based on public funding or requires the involvement of public administration staff—adherence to the principle of efficiency is a sine qua non for a properly planned and conducted evaluation.
13.7 A good practice for applying the principle of efficiency in evaluation is to summarize
the conducted evaluation process in terms of its efficiency, which makes the whole proces transparent in terms of its content and execution. Such a summary can provide a reference point for optimizing future evaluation processes’ efficiency.- 14. Proper management
14.1 Proper management of the evaluation process must comply with the law, ensure adequate access to information and resources, clearly divide roles and responsibilities among the participants involved in the evaluation, and create effective channels of information and communication between the process’s stakeholders.
14.2 Documentation of the evaluation process should ensure that the particular stages are transparent and easy to verify later. It is an essential management tool but not an end in itself. It should enable the ongoing and future use of the evaluation process’s results, conclusions, and recommendations.
14.3 The evaluation should be timed so that its results can be considered in upcoming decision-making, corrective, and other processes.
14.4 Proper management of the evaluation process considers its cultural context, including established values, traditions, and other elements essential to the participants, and facilitates a balance between their rights and the institutional system.
***
The axiological and guiding principles of the Polish Evaluation Society presented above relate to the content of documents adopted by leading evaluation associations. These documents are created as a result of reflection seeking answers to the question of how associations of evaluators should operate and how their members, practicing their profession, should act to promote understanding of the importance of evaluation and thus build trust in it and high prestige of the evaluation profession.
The Polish experience of the last several years fully confirms the necessity of such continuous reflection and debate in the evaluation community. It makes us aware of the strategic importance of the principles for developing an evaluation culture, for the process of crystallizing the role and position of evaluation in Poland, and for evaluation to effectively fulfill its functions. These are,among others, to strengthen democratization processes, increase the authorities’ responsibility, promote the involvement of society in public affairs, and support the decision-making proces concerning the problems and challenges of the functioning and development of the country and local entities.
Developed by:
prof. Leszek Korporowicz
Marian Anasz
Monika Bartosiewicz-Niziołek
Beata Ciężka
Anna Kierzkowska-Tokarska
Michał Korczyński
Joanna Wojtyńska
In cooperation with Mirela Kiełbasiewicz
19 March, 2024
