Self-assessment tools include a wide range of methods to gather information about a current situation or performance. They are designed to answer the question, "How are we doing?" These tools range from something as simple as a newspaper survey asking readers to rate their knowledge of the Internet to the kind of year-long institutional self-assessment procedures used in hospital accreditation. The essential element in all self-assessment tools is that only the group being assessed answers the questions.

Self-administered questionnaires. The simplest form of self-assessment is a self-administered questionnaire or test. In order for the assessment to be effective, the questions must be sound and the participants must understand what is being asked and provide valid responses.

Informal evaluations. For informal self-assessments, neither the questions nor the resulting interpretation scales have any particular scientific basis. They are at best rough guides.

Formal evaluations. More comprehensive self-assessments and accreditation procedures usually involve the participation of those being assessed in setting and reviewing goals. In the typical institutional assessment, the evaluation criteria are a mix of external standards developed by the accrediting body combined with the institution's own goals and criteria.

Evaluating performance. If well designed, a self-assessment can be a highly efficient kind of performance or status evaluation. Once developed, the tools may be used repeatedly without the need for outside intervention.

Building consensus and morale. The deliberative processes in setting goals and reviewing performance can have positive effects on the organization by building consensus, enhancing morale, and increasing understanding of operations.

Screening for problems. Self-assessment instruments can also be screening devices to identify possible problems or areas for further attention. Self-administered surveys are often used in organizational development work to identify these areas and issues.

Planning. Self-assessment can also be used as a planning tool. It can assess past and current progress to inform strategic project management planning.

Hard to validate. Self-assessment tools are difficult to validate. The fact that they produce a measurement or evaluation result does not mean that it is accurate or meaningful. Interpretation must be done with careful attention to the validity of the tools and how they were used.

Distorted results. While all data collection results can be distorted in a number of ways, the nature of self-assessments may be more susceptible to this phenomenon. Those being assessed may deliberately provide false or misleading information to promote their own interests; provide inaccurate data due to their own biases, faulty memories, or flawed perceptions; or be unduly influenced by others in the process, either deliberately or inadvertently.

Bias of the tools. The tools themselves could be badly designed or insufficiently tested, or there may be accidental but serious flaws in the information produced. The assessment tools could be deliberately designed to favor a particular point of view or desired outcome.

Resource intensive. The kinds of information called for by assessment tools can be quite extensive and complex to assemble. While you may avoid the costs of external consultants and analysts, the kinds of internal deliberations involved in institutional self-assessments require considerable staff time.

Strategic Planning Process Self-Assessment Questionnaire for Federal/Government Agencies. www.strategicfutures.com/articles/stratpln/gov/quesgov.htm. Retrieved May 27, 2003.

Building Smart Communities (1997). San Diego, CA: International Center for Communications, San Diego State University. www.smartcommunities.org/index2.html. Retrieved May 27, 2003.