Beyond technical adequacy: A holistic framework for evaluating artificial intelligence systems through the scaling responsible artificial intelligence mentorship approach

Artificial intelligence evaluation practices face a fundamental challenge: traditional technical measures cannot adequately capture the complex socio-organizational impacts of artificial intelligence systems in real-world contexts. This research bridges the critical gap between technical evaluation and holistic evaluation by exploring how insights from evaluation theory can inform artificial intelligence system assessment. Using a mixed-methods case approach inspired by developmental evaluation, realistic evaluation, and empowerment evaluation principles, we analyzed 12 artificial intelligence implementations in organizations within the scaling responsible artificial intelligence mentoring program. Data collection consisted of semi-structured participant interviews, participant observation, and data extraction from various institutional databases, all guided by specific evaluation theoretical frameworks. Our analysis reveals five generative principles for a holistic evaluation of artificial intelligence: epistemic pluralism, democratic authority, contextual responsiveness, temporal sensitivity, and reflexive critique. These principles transcend procedural criteria to encompass fundamental epistemological changes in technology governance. This framework challenges technocentric evaluation paradigms and provides theoretical and practical guidance to organizations implementing artificial intelligence systems in diverse cultural contexts.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Evaluation
Published
2025-12-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890251387137
Primary Topic
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Beyond technical adequacy: A holistic framework for evaluating artificial intelligence systems through the scaling responsible artificial intelligence mentorship approach

Caroline Gans Combe
Evaluation
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
article

Beyond technical adequacy: A holistic framework for evaluating artificial intelligence systems through the scaling responsible artificial intelligence mentorship approach

Caroline Gans Combe
article en

Abstract

Artificial intelligence evaluation practices face a fundamental challenge: traditional technical measures cannot adequately capture the complex socio-organizational impacts of artificial intelligence systems in real-world contexts. This research bridges the critical gap between technical evaluation and holistic evaluation by exploring how insights from evaluation theory can inform artificial intelligence system assessment. Using a mixed-methods case approach inspired by developmental evaluation, realistic evaluation, and empowerment evaluation principles, we analyzed 12 artificial intelligence implementations in organizations within the scaling responsible artificial intelligence mentoring program. Data collection consisted of semi-structured participant interviews, participant observation, and data extraction from various institutional databases, all guided by specific evaluation theoretical frameworks. Our analysis reveals five generative principles for a holistic evaluation of artificial intelligence: epistemic pluralism, democratic authority, contextual responsiveness, temporal sensitivity, and reflexive critique. These principles transcend procedural criteria to encompass fundamental epistemological changes in technology governance. This framework challenges technocentric evaluation paradigms and provides theoretical and practical guidance to organizations implementing artificial intelligence systems in diverse cultural contexts.

Evaluation
INSEEC School of Business and Economics (FR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 59%
Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.