Assignment:
1. Integrity/Honesty
2. Competence
3. Respect for people
4. Responsibilities for general and public welfare
As I see it, Fiona was placed in a position that pulled at ethical as well as moral values. On one side, because of incompetent campaign promises, the governor pointed a finger at an area that he felt he could retrieve money for the budget that he promised to balance (McDavid, Huse and Hawthorn, 2013). On the other side, you have a deputy director that worked hard for her programs that might get cut (McDavid, Huse and Hawthorn, 2013).
The dilemma is to the point that Fiona is worrying about compromising her ethics as well as her morals. At this point, integrity comes in, for which Fiona must follow the guidelines that have been set in her department as to the conduct of a solid yet accurate evaluation. The stakeholders in this instance are the citizens of the state who demand that Fiona's department does not compromise their integrity or honesty.
Fiona's department's competence should never have come into question because of their ability to perform the task in front of them with skill and knowledge (American Evaluation Association, 2004). The only reason why their competency came into question was due to the fact that they are skilled and knowledgeable, for which the deputy director felt that they would find fault in her programs. First and foremost, if the deputy director's programs were the saving grace for the public then she would have no problem with Fiona conducting the evaluation.
In this same breath, the governor should have had the respect for his people and not have put the Human Resources department between a rock and a hard place for promises that he made and could not keep. There is a valuable degree of respect for people that must be administered in not compromising the ethics, standards and procedures of the evaluating members (American Evaluation Association, 2004).
The importance is that the best interest of the public, the overall stakeholders, be in the strictest of considerations. Finally, responsibilities for general and public welfare speak of the interests and perspectives of the public regarding the operations and outcomes that will affect their lives (American Evaluation Association, 2004).
Fiona must follow procedures and guidelines for the evaluation, no matter the circumstances or consequences. My stand is that there is no reason to compromise your integrity, honesty, ethics or standards from any point to pease someone who clearly is not standing upon their integrity, honesty, ethics or standards. I would conduct the evaluation completely, by the book. I would present the results of the evaluation to the director, due mainly because of unethical behaviors from the deputy director and the governor. Once that is complete, then whatever happens, at least I knew that I did not compromise my ethics or integrity just to ease someone's loss of theirs.
Reference
American Evaluation Association. (2004). American evaluation association's guiding principles for evaluators.
McDavid, J. C., Huse, I., & Hawthorn, L. R. L. (2013). Program evaluation and performance measurement: An introduction to practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.