The answer to each of the questions is meant to be a subjective one; in your opinion.
Here’s how it works (taken from the description on page 6 of the book): Read the question and rate it with the following in front of mind:
‘In my belief, the answer to this question is clearly defined’.
There are two ways in which you can choose to interpret this statement;
how aware are you that the answer to the question is clearly defined
for more in-depth analysis you can choose to gather evidence and confirm the answer to the question. This obviously will take more time, most Self-Assessment users opt for the first way to interpret the question and dig deeper later on based on the outcome of the overall Self-Assessment.
A score of ‘1’ would mean that the answer is not clear at all, where a ‘5’ would mean the answer is crystal clear and defined. Leave empty when the question is not applicable or you don’t want to answer it, you can skip it without affecting your score. Write your score in the space provided.
But what does that mean? How should you answer these questions? Think of a body builder… you want to see their muscles. Everything has to be clearly defined: there is no misunderstanding where the muscle starts and other tissues finish. You can clearly see the muscle fibres without being distracted by other things.
That’s how you answer these questions. Is it black and white? Do you have a solid answer to these questions?
So with this example (To what extent do your HR professionals demonstrate competence in strategic contribution, HR delivery, business knowledge, personal credibility, and HR technology? )
How clear is it that your HR professionals demonstrate that competence? Is it obvious? If you have to search for the answer, or you’re not 100% sure what it would look like when an HR professional demonstrates that competence you can’t answer the question with a 5. It would be a 3 or 4 at most.