| In this dissertation, I examine the development and effects of evaluative cultures through a comparison of evaluation in two fields: figure skating, a case of standardized and highly formal evaluation, and classical music, which operates under a range of evaluative cultures that are generally much less formal. Drawing on interviews, participant observation, and archival data, I suggest that the institutional politics, trust, and controversy surrounding evaluative cultures help predict their formality and, in turn, how they affect judging and performance. I also argue that the more formal an evaluation system is, the more influential it is as far as changing performance or whatever the system was designed to evaluate, and the more likely it is to emphasize technical over artistic factors and to clearly distinguish between these two areas. In addition to adding a focus on why differences in evaluative cultures arise and their consequences for performance and behavior, my work adds nuance to our understanding of the reactivity of evaluation systems by discussing the conditions that make certain forms of evaluation more reactive than others. Based on my findings, even when organizations adopt more formal procedures to pursue noble ends, such as limiting bias and promoting fairness, formalization has the potential to lead to far-reaching and sometimes detrimental consequences. The devaluation of artistry in figure skating following the introduction of a highly formal judging system and the fact that many music insiders still emphasize artistic aspects of performance underscore the potential benefits of evaluation systems with flexible procedures compared to systems with specific rules. |
