Hi, I’m Diana Lemos, PhD, MPH, and I have been a DEI workgroup member since its inception. Today, I will offer some reflections on the tool development process.
To systematically examine AEA’s programs, policies, and practices through a lens of DEI, sub-group #4 of the working group has been developing an assessment tool. The five members of this sub-group underwent a collaborative process to explore existing tools that could provide a foundation for the assessment tool. The workgroup selected the FSG’s Water of Systems Change framework, which focuses on six conditions of systems change (Figure 1) to advance equity. One compelling reason for selecting this tool was its emphasis on the explicit, semi-explicit and the implicit factors that must change in order to truly impact systems.
Figure 1.
We offer reflections from this process, which may support other organizations to develop processes that promote equity and transform the systems through which they operate. We recognize that our work can easily take on the characteristics of white supremacy even in efforts to advance equity and justice in our work. White supremacy culture, as coined byTema Okun, is characterized by 15 behaviors that are often interconnected and mutually reinforcing, and show up in our personal and professional lives. These behaviors uphold racist systems that target and violate systematically marginalized people and communities, and there is a need to unpack how these dominant practices narratives show up in our work.
Reflection #1: Unpacking the explicit, semi-explicit, and implicit models impacting systems change requires close examination of relationships and connection and power dynamics and must center those often excluded from these aspects of relational change.
Through our exploratory conversations with key evaluators, we recognized that there were relationships and connections that impacted the power dynamics as to how the evaluation field advances and elevates voices. These were both explicit, semi-explicit but also implicit. The explicit is often easy to measure through the written and visible policies and practices and resource flows. The other semi-explicit practices are harder to measure because of the worship of the written word. We recognize that to uncover these semi-explicit practices we need more resources, time and trust building with members who feel unheard or unseen because of these potentially oppressive practices.
Dialogue, formal and informal, with members or intended audiences around the inequitable practices of an organization is critical. There is a value in capturing these perspectives in advance of a formal assessment as it uncovers the semi-explicit practices that are difficult to capture in assessments.
Reflection #2: Adaptation requires ongoing reflection and discussion which pushes against a sense of urgency, the longstanding principle that upholds a culture of white supremacy.
The workgroup openly discussed setting realistic goals and expectations, and adjusted work plans to respect the lives, professional and personal, of the workgroup members. We continuously reflected on the emerging assessment tool that would evolve and shift based on this ongoing reflection and dialogue via meeting notes, comments in rubric development, and open discussion.
Reflection #3: Recognizing that complex systems change is intended to change power dynamics and transform systems that have used data to uphold oppressive practices therefore we grappled with challenging the white supremacy notion of objectivity that often drives our work.
The workgroup grappled with methodology that documents and provides a baseline assessment of the extent to which our initiatives reflect equitable principles and practices. Recognizing the need to establish not only a current state but also an ideal state, the workgroup decided that the tool would need to have a level of rigor and objectivity that provides a North Star opportunity for initiatives to advance towards more equity-oriented practices.
The American Evaluation Association is hosting DEI Week with our colleagues in AEA’s DEI Working Group. The contributions all this week to AEA365 come from working group members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this AEA365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the AEA365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an AEA365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to AEA365@eval.org. AEA365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.