Making Powerful Assessments

PRACTICE GUIDE – Languaging

What is an Assessment?

An assessment is an opinion we form, a judgment we make or a concern we express that we believe to be true for us, but cannot be easily verified with objective facts to prove if what we are saying is right or wrong, good or bad. It explains how we relate to someone or something that matters to us. It’s our opinion. What makes it powerful is when it is “grounded” in the mind of the listener and they accept the validity and authenticity of the assessment it will be a reflection on their own experience.

We can only assert what is true when we can provide evidence that can be agreed upon by a general consensus. But even definitions of fact can be in dispute, so we follow a statement of a fact with our interpretation of it in a given context. For example, the diagram below shows how a different way of assessing leadership results if a different way of seeing and being in a leadership role. It may have to be qualified when used in a different context. This makes it more difficult as the world becomes more complex we have to make more distinctions, to separate what is a current assessment from an assertion made in the past.

In a business, legal and other contexts it is absolutely vital to be able to make a clear distinction between an opinion and a fact. Even in social situations, it might be my opinion that my friend is depressed because they have been rejected for a promotion at work.  If they cannot accept this event as fact, they cannot see any other interpretation than they are a failure or misunderstood and are stuck in a mood resentment or resignation.

So What does this mean?

An assertion belongs to a characteristic of something being observed, whereas an assessment is an interpretation made by an observer. To say that the temperature is 26 degrees centigrade can be asserted with the evidence of a thermometer. To say it is “hot” is a personal observation, matter of opinion, an assessment.

We bring our assertions from past experience and knowledge. We use them to make assessments in the present that become stepping-stones to how we will interpret and influence the future we want to see. For example, if we make a declaration that we will deliver something by a certain date we have made an assessment based on previous experience of being able to act in ways that we know will produce the result. It’s an assessment grounded on being reliable in the past.

What’s open to question is the level of predictability in the context that enables the result to be delivered to an agreed standard. If the standard is clearly asserted and can be evidenced it makes the assessment of satisfaction easier.  The danger lies in personal assessments of what satisfaction means, how they are seen and interpreted by the observers, who may have different expectations.  For example, a prenuptial agreement says more about the values and beliefs of the people involved that it does about the arrangement.  Self-Assessments can depend on how we see ourselves as much as how we see others. If we don’t trust someone, we make it an assessment of them, not how we see ourselves.

For example, when we sign up for something we commit ourselves to follow the rules, out of respect for others and our own integrity. Others might see these rules as petty or not sensible. When we commit to a particular interpretation of a situation we are making a self-assessment that predisposes us to act as our emotions and attitude dictate. Others rely on logic and responsibility to determine their standards of behaviour. How we produce, script and direct our world from the “inside” determines what we see as the world “outside”.

What Next?

Much depends on where the energy for an assessment is coming from. For example, when we get other people’s assessments of us they tend to accept them from people around us that we know and trust. This is the bottom-up energy that we can use to get perspectives on our behaviour that we may not see ourselves. Whether it’s positive or negative, it energises us to think differently or take action to get a more acceptable reaction. In either event, you get to choose.

If you want to know something about yourself, do you ask someone else or make your own assessment?

In some situations, you give permission to someone who has authority over you to make assessments of your behaviour.  People such as your boss, a parent and a judge provide top-down energy that can shake you into changing your behaviour.  Obviously, context is important.  Your boss does not have the authority to comment on your personal life whereas a parent often feels they can.

What authority do you have to assess the behaviour of others?  In what context?

Many of us work to serve customers or clients who have the right to assess our performance.  This is an example of outside-in energy that has the power to influence our behaviour. We are often unaware of how adverts, social media and the press are making assessments of what is wrong with our behaviour, what they think we need or should like.

Are your choices defined by what’s in fashion or appeal to your desire to be happy and belong?

When you make your own assessments they are true for you and you have a responsibility to ground them in observable behaviour or publicly declared standards that are culturally appropriate.  We give our assessments inside-out energy when we have a strong rational basis for making them, such as evidence that supports your opinion. Our assessments will have more power and be more acceptable to others if we are not just talking out of our backside.

Do you clarify the standards you are using, to make your assessment, who shares it and why you are making it?

Practices

1.  In what situations have you found yourself making blind assessments of other people or events, that you have had to apologise for later when you got to know the person or the circumstances?

2.  Politicians like to manipulate our thinking by giving the impression that what is true to them can be verified with evidenced. The problem with facts is that they can be interpreted differently. In what circumstances do you make a distinction between what is verifiably “true” and your own “truth” when making an assessment?  Consider this question in the context of different types of conversation.

• Conversations to build trusting relationships
• Conversations to promote speculation and creative thinking
• Conversations to establish a shared understanding
• Conversations to coordinate action and monitor results.

References

Language and the Pursuit of Leadership Excellence by Charmers Brothers & Vinay Kumar.  New Possibilities 2015

Building Trust by Robert Solomon and Fernando Flores. Addison Wesley 1987

Coaching to the Human Soul Vol 1 by Alan Sieler.  Newfield Australia 2003

The Innovator’s Way by Peter Denning & Bob Dunham.  MIT 2010