Evaluation, often perceived as a neutral, technical process, is in fact a politically charged and socially constructed practice that shapes the very realities it aims to assess. Rooted in the rationalist tradition of diagnosis, planning, and impact analysis, evaluation has long been deployed as a managerial tool aligned with positivist assumptions. However, Fernández-Ramírez repositions it within a postmodern and constructionist framework, emphasizing its reifying power: the capacity of evaluation criteria to define what counts as valuable, desirable, or even real within organizations. The evaluative act thus becomes inherently strategic, not only measuring performance but also reinforcing or challenging dominant interests. From this perspective, indicators are not neutral reflections of preexisting qualities—they are constructs that delimit organizational behavior, often solidifying hegemonic norms under the guise of objectivity. By proposing a shift from improvement and accountability toward strategic legitimation, Fernández-Ramírez advocates a critical rethinking of evaluation as a tool for democratic negotiation and institutional transformation. The evaluator's role is no longer that of a distant technician but of a facilitator mediating between competing stakeholder visions. In recognizing the inherently normative nature of evaluative criteria, this approach highlights the ethical responsibility of evaluators to make explicit the political implications of their work and to actively support collective aspirations for change. Ultimately, evaluation becomes a site of struggle over meaning, direction, and power—capable of shaping futures rather than merely describing pasts.
Fernández-Ramírez, B. (2009) Construccionismo, postmodernismo y teoría de la evaluación. La función estratégica de la evaluación, Athenea Digital, 15, pp. 119–134.
