Diversity can be a goal in itself when diversity means breaking down barriers of groupthink and apathy.  An expansive concept.

Fairness, on the other hand is elusive, demanding definition.  Fairness depends on the very point of view it attempts to define.  “Fair” is in the eye of the beholder.

EBV (Evidence Based Valuation)© (or EBA, Evidence Based Appraisal)© does not directly address fairness, diversity, prejudice or personal (conscious or unconscious) bias.  EBV does significantly uncover a foundation where both types of bias are identified, addressed, and even eliminated.

Traditional appraisal (and “evaluation”) is vulnerable to bias.  Its foundation, “picking comps”, is subjective and personal from the start.

AVM (“Automated” Valuation Models) have evolved as an industry, not as a particular type of algorithm.  The internal algorithms are considered proprietary secrets to be kept from competing AVM companies.  Whoever keeps the best secret wins.  Unfortunately, any bias, assumption, or algorithmic result is hidden, even if it perpetuates unfairness and conceals any prejudicial bias.

The solution is simple, yet elusive – gridlocked by the five forces of friction.

The mass elusion is built-in.  Our prior Analogue Blog articles identify the five friction sources which collectively block any real hope of change.  These include the appraisal process, appraisal standards, appraisal education, client expectation, and appraisal regulation (including 54 jurisdictions, each with different forms, fees, administrative efficiency, and competency).

It is well to note that the five frictions are actually five forces of vortex, mutually pulling each other toward the old subjective ways of doing things.  Changing any one or two forces will simply return to the fixed, obsolete, and outdated way of providing a product which does not really solve the needs of the public trust.  (Recall, that we have had a crisis of finance and real estate every 12-15 years, regularly.)

The noted subjectivity and secrecy perpetuate the valuation process in ways vulnerable to personal bias.  Worse yet any personal bias (intentional or unintentional) is hidden by the analytic bias which can be used to cover or hide or simply ignore actual religious, race, or other prejudices.

So long as data is personal-judgment based, vulnerable to analytic bias, diversity is discouraged.

In my stats and graphs classes, I often ask:  “Is it possible to lie with statistics?”  Heads shake yes.  Then I ask: “Is it possible to lie with graphs?”  More shaking heads.  Finally, I ask:  “Is it possible for lie with words?”  Silence. Then. The question:  “What is the one thing in common with all three?”

Only the person doing the communication.  The person.

So long as the valuation process starts with subjective data selection – or via secret preprogrammed neighborhood search algorithms – the result carries the original data selection bias.

The vortex of subjectivity and bias resides in every one of our five forces of friction:  1) the process; 2) the standards; 3) education; 4) client expectation; and 5) regulation.  These reinforce and stabilize each other.

Until this vortex is resolved, it will be difficult to convince many toward diversity, objectivity, and real consideration of the three social/economic impacts:  consumers, taxpayers, and opposing viewpoints on social justice.