In respect of the root foundations, mentioned at the end of the last post, evaluators will certainly be challenged to glean whether or not we, staff members, are allowed be.
I believe the only way to do it is if the evaluators immerse themselves in our organisation while our day-to-day work is going on. (There are a few big words like action, ethnographic, or phenomenological research to describe this. If you have an interest in any of them please look them up).
But big words or not, immersion probably has the best chance of unearthing findings that are true to what is being evaluated.
How can that possibly be gleaned?
Tick-box surveys about matters to do with our emotions are far less effective than hearing spontaneous views – delivered from the heart – by being with us a lot. I don’t believe that surveys reveal how the root foundations are honoured or encouraged, or simply are given permission to flourish. I just don’t think it is possible to glean felt, intuitive factors through a cognitive process.
Just to illustrate this point I’ll take the example of identity.
There are loads of tick-box questions that evaluators could think up on the subject of identity, but if they are with us for a longish time they will form a much more accurate view. It will be revealed in the way we talk about our organisation, i.e. do we use us or them, we or me, speak vaguely about our work or with pride and conviction, and (yes – this is important) do we feel that we have a strong enough identity for us to be critical without feeling afraid something bad will happen.
And it is the same with emergence. If our emergent properties (individual and group) are honoured it will be immediately evident to a perceptive evaluator, or, indeed, any observer with interest, awareness and knowledge.
It would be very difficult to assess all the above cognitively!