GEC-SAT

GOVERNMENT EXCELLENCE CLASS

SELF-ASSESSMENT TOOL

FACILITATOR’S GUIDE

Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP)

 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The Development Academy of the Philippines (DAP) acknowledges with sincere appreciation
the invaluable contributions of Dr. Robin S. Mann and the Centre for Organizational Excellence
Research (COER) Ltd., for the development and use of the Government Excellence Class Self-
Assessment Tool (GEC-SAT) by public sector organizations in the Philippines.

It is noteworthy to mention that Dr. Robin S. Mann’s professional advice to the DAP Project
Team, through his deputation as a Technical Expert of the Asian Productivity Organization
(APO) and on his personal capacity, has immensely contributed to the program
implementation of the Government Excellence Class (GEC).

Correspondingly, the Academy extends its special recognition to the DAP –Center for Quality
and Competitiveness (CQC) Project Team in bringing the Government Excellence Class (GEC)
into a reality. Thus, addressing the Philippine Development Plan’s (PDP) 2011-2016 strategy
for effective and honest governance, through the administration of a self-assessment for public
sector organizations, recognize commendable efforts through the GEC and to draw an agency
action plan in response to opportunities for improvement in public service delivery.

The DAP-CQC Project Team deserves special mention for its dedication and collective
technical efforts in the preparation and implementation of the Government Excellence Class
(GEC) and in customizing the GEC-SAT to the Philippine public sector setting. Special
recognition goes to: Arnel D. Abanto, Managing Director and Vice-President, CQC; Ma. Theresa
A. Agustin, Program Director, CQC-ICD & SME; Melani G. Mercader, Project Manager;
Technical Team Members, Ceazar Valerei E. Navarro, Chenier Nicu V. Villanueva and
Maegan S. Saroca.

Particular recognition extends to highly esteemed contributors in the GEC, namely: DAP
Senior Vice-President Magdalena L. Mendoza for her technical guidance in the development
and implementation of the GEC, Presidential Communications Operations Office
(PCOO)Secretary Herminio B. Coloma, Jr. for his technical advice on the implementation and
on the promotion of the GEC; and to, the Asian Productivity Organization (APO) and the
Academy’s APO Liaison Office for its continuous support in the Academy’s business excellence
program and for the deputation of Dr. Robin S. Mann.

Through all these collective contributions, the GEC is set to chart the commendable efforts
and the journey to excellence of public sector organizations in the Philippines.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 1 of 20

 FACILITATOR’S GUIDE
INTRODUCTION

As the Facilitator you need to familiarize yourself with the whole Self-Assessment Pack (GEC-
SAT Instructions, GEC-SAT Facilitator’s Guide, GEC-SAT Consensus Scorecard, GEC-SAT
Spreadsheet, GEC-SAT Team Member’s Guide, GEC-SAT Team Member’s Questionnaire, and
GEC-SAT Team Member’s Scorecard). Particular attention needs to be given to the Facilitator’s
Guide.

The Facilitator’s Guide is composed of six sections:

PRIOR TO THE TEAM CONSENSUS MEETING

DURING THE TEAM CONSENSUS MEETING
AFTER THE TEAM CONSENSUS MEETING
CONSENSUS MEETING TIME-PLAN
STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM
FACILITATOR QUESTIONS

This Guide and the other parts of the GEC-SAT pack have been written to guide your self-
assessment approach.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 2 of 20

 PRIOR TO THE TEAM CONSENSUS MEETING

Familiarize yourself with the whole Self-Assessment Pack.

Consider which approach to use for the self-assessment. Select from the 3 options below.

Recommended Advantages Disadvantages

Approaches
Option 1
Easiest approach to get Staff not included in the process
Select a team of 4 to 8 support for as it requires the may feel left out and no buy-in
people to form the least amount of resource to the findings or agree with the
GEC-SAT Team. The self-assessment can be actions.
These team members completed quickly, the The views of the team may not
will be the only people consensus meeting will be be representative or they may
who complete the self- easy to facilitate and issues not have the knowledge to
assessment questions can be explored in depth. answer some questions.
and attend the Staff who are not involved
consensus meeting. can still be made to feel part
of the process through
effective communication.
Option 2
The viewpoint of all staff is More time consuming to involve
Select a team of 4 to 8 encouraged. Therefore, the more staff.
people to form the feedback will be more The purpose and expectations
GEC-SAT Team. representative. of the self-assessment have to
These team members More staff will learn about be carefully managed with more
will complete the self- business excellence through training/awareness sessions
assessment questions completing the self- given.
but also some or all assessment questions. Staff may only have an intimate
other staff will be The consensus meeting will knowledge of their own work
invited to complete the be easy to facilitate and area and will be guessing at the
self-assessment issues can be explored in answers to questions unless
questions. However, depth as it is restricted to they are only given questions
only the GEC-SAT GEC-SAT Team members relevant to their area or are
Team will attend the only. under strict instructions to miss
consensus meeting. out questions that they have no
knowledge of.
If more staff complete the self-
assessment questions but do
not attend the consensus
meeting, they will want to see
clear outcomes or they may
become disillusioned with the
process.
Option 3
The viewpoint of all staff is More time consuming to involve
Select a team of 4 to 8 encouraged therefore the more staff.
people to form the feedback will be more The purpose and expectations
GEC-SAT Team. representative of the self-assessment and
These team members More staff will learn about consensus meeting have to be
will complete the self- business excellence though carefully managed with more
assessment questions completing the self- training/awareness sessions
but also some or all assessment questions and given.
GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 3 of 20
other staff will be participating in the It can be difficult to facilitate a
invited to complete the consensus meeting consensus meeting with large
self-assessment More staff will learn in detail groups of people.
questions and attend about their own organization Staff at the consensus meeting
the consensus meeting. by listening to the views of may become frustrated if their
At the consensus others at the consensus voice is not heard due to time
meeting the views of meeting. This may lead to a limitations.
the GEC-SAT Team common and unified view of Staff may be less willing to
will primarily be sought the organization. share their views with a large
but there will be an group for fear of upsetting
opportunity for others to people and/or fear of appearing
share their views. ignorant.

FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE FACILITATOR’S GUIDE IT HAS BEEN ASSUMED

OPTION 1 HAS BEEN SELECTED.

If you have selected Option 2 or 3 the Guide will still be relevant although you will need to
tailor the instructions to these options.

Consider if you wish to change some of the terminology used within the self-assessment to fit
your agency. This is not encouraged but it is realized that in some instances this may assist in
obtaining commitment to complete the self-assessment. For example, changing a “customer”
to a “citizen”, or as a “patient” if your agency is a hospital. However, the essence of a
question and other wording should not be changed. The questions have been designed
to be generic to fit any public sector organization.

Select 4–8 people to form the GEC-SAT Team. In choosing the members you should aim to
meet the following criteria:

 the team members as a group should have a good idea of what goes on in all parts of
the agency (mandatory). Therefore, each team member should have a good knowledge
of the agency’s systems and approach to one or more of the following areas;
Leadership, Strategy, Citizens, Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management,
Human Resource Focus, Operations Focus and Results.

 they should represent a cross section of the agency (therefore have representation
from front-line staff as well as senior managers)

 they should be objective

 they should be prepared to reach consensus with other members of the team

 they should not be afraid to discuss honestly and objectively

Once the team has been selected, you will need to hold a briefing meeting to explain the
purpose of the self-assessment. In particular, talk them through the contents of the GEC-SAT
Team Member’s Guide.

Team Members should be given a copy of the GEC-SAT Team Member’s Guide, GEC-SAT
Team Member’s Questionnaire and the GEC-SAT Team Member’s Scorecard. It is
optional whether a copy of the GEC-SAT Instructions is given to aid in their understanding of
the whole GEC-SAT process. Electronic or hard copies of these documents can be used.
GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 4 of 20
Team Members are required to individually complete the GEC-SAT Team Member’s
Questionnaire and Strengths and Opportunities Forms in preparation for the Team
Consensus Meeting. Emphasize that you would like each team member to complete at
least three key strengths and opportunities for each Criteria for Performance
Excellence (CPE) Item that they are familiar with. Should they have any problems, they
should refer to you only.

Offer support to the Team throughout the assessment process. Some Team Members may
struggle with the language used in the questionnaire or find it difficult to answer some
questions. Explain that they should only answer questions if they have knowledge related to
the question. The approach does not expect that all Team Members can answer every
question - this is why there is a team approach to ensure that all areas of your agency is
represented. Also, some Team Members may not have enough knowledge to complete all
the Strengths and Opportunities Forms.

Provide a date by which you require the GEC-SAT Team Member’s Scorecards and Strengths
and Opportunities Forms returned and agree on a time and a date for the Team Consensus
Meeting.

When the Team Member’s Scorecards are returned, transfer the responses to the GEC-SAT
Consensus Spreadsheet. This spreadsheet will automatically calculate the median average
and range for each question based on the responses from your team.

If you prefer not to use the spreadsheet you can work out the median average by first of all
placing the responses in order. Therefore, if the responses to question 15 are Team Member
1 = 3, TM 2 = 2, TM 3 = 4, TM 4 = 5, TM 5 = 4, TM 6 = 3 the responses would be placed in
this order 2,3,3,4,4,5. The median (middle) value in this case equals 3.5 as with an even
number of responses you need to calculate the mean average of the middle two numbers.
With an odd number of responses the median is the response in the middle. For example if
there were seven team members and TM 7 responded 5 then the median average would
equal 4.

Collect the Strengths and Opportunities Forms from each Team Member. Copy everyone’s
comments for each CPE Item onto one Form per CPE Item. Collating the information together
will be of assistance at the Team Consensus Meeting and Action Planning Meeting.

The minimum recommended length for a Consensus Meeting is 4 hours. The maximum
recommended length is 8 hours. This should include 20 minutes for an introduction on how
the Consensus Meeting will be ran (instructions are on the next page),15 minutes for
concluding that includes a discussion on Action Planning (instructions are on the next page),
5 minutes per CPE Item to agree on Item Strengths and Opportunities and time spent on
reaching consensus for each question. Additionally, time should be allocated for breaks and
lunch.

Use the Consensus Meeting Time-Plan to plan for the Consensus Meeting. Record how
long the Team should spend on each CPE Item and track progress against it. It is
recommended that your Team spend most of the time debating on those questions where
there is the greatest variation in response and for the other questions accepting the median
average (unless there are any reasonable objections from a Team Member).

Allocating time example - From your Team’s responses, you may have 10 questions where
the range in response is 1, 46 questions with a range of 2, 20 questions with a range of 3, and
GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 5 of 20
5 questions with a range of 4. Therefore, before the Consensus Meeting, work out how many
questions you would like your Team to debate on, based on 10 minutes discussion per
question. For instance, you may decide to debate on all those questions with a range of 3 or
more. In this case there would be 25 questions which would take 250 minutes to debate.
Therefore an 8 hour meeting would allow plenty of time to debate these questions and agree
on the responses to the other questions. As you will know which CPE Items the 25 questions
relate to, you will also be able to estimate how long to spend on each Item (if allocating 10
minutes for 25 questions and for example, 2 minutes per question for the other questions) and
so be able to complete the Consensus Meeting Time-Plan.

Arrange for a suitable room for the Consensus Meeting where outside disturbances will be
kept to a minimum, and ask for all mobiles/tablets to be switched off. Arrange for a data
projector and laptop so that you can show on screen the GEC-SAT Team Members
Questionnaire, Strengths and Opportunities Forms and GEC-SAT Consensus
Spreadsheet, and edit the documents as necessary. If you do not have a data projector,
arrange for a white board or flip chart for note taking.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 6 of 20

 DURING THE TEAM CONSENSUS MEETING

Brief the Team Members on how you intend to run the meeting and the need to reach
consensus.

Remind the Team Members that they need to:

- be open, honest and objective; the purpose is not to make your agency look better
than it really is, but to record an objective and dispassionate view that could be
supported by tangible evidence if required. Emphasize that anecdotal information is
not helpful.
- focus on answering the questions; the process involves debate but the debate should
remain focused on completing the self-assessment. Action planning will be addressed
at a future meeting.
- select the answer which most accurately describes your agency as it is today; not as it
will be in the near or distant future.

Use a data projector and laptop so that you can show on a screen the GEC-SAT Team
Members Questionnaire and update the Strengths and Opportunities Forms and GEC-
SAT Consensus Spreadsheet. Set up the computer so that you can move quickly from one
document to another. If you do not have a data projector, arrange for a white board or flip
chart for note taking.

For each Criteria for Performance Excellence (CPE) Item, work through the following steps:
- Select the Item to reach consensus on. The order with which you go through the 17
Items is your choice.
- Inform the Team Members on how much time will be spent on the Item and how many
questions will be fully debated (those that have a large variation (or range) in
response).
- Begin by displaying on the data projector (or white board/flip chart/hand-out) the
collated strengths and opportunities of the Item. These will have been collected from
the team’s Strengths and Opportunities Forms. Spend 5 minutes on obtaining
consensus on the strengths and opportunities. If consensus cannot be reached on a
particular issue highlight it for discussion at a later time.
- Display the range and median average for each question. Work one by one through
those questions that were highlighted for debate. Firstly, for each of the “debate”
questions, ask if anyone would like to change their response based on seeing all the
strengths and opportunities. If not, then ask those Team Members’ whose response
deviated most from the median what tangible/documented evidence do they have to
support their response. If the debate does not result in a consensus opinion then take
the median value. If the median value is a fraction (e.g. 3.5) you will need the Team
Members to vote on whether to score the response as a 3 or 4. Note that any new
strengths and opportunities that arise from these discussions should be added to the
Strengths and Opportunities Form for the relevant Item. This information will be
useful for the Action Planning Meeting.
- With the time remaining, focus on the other questions. For each question, ask if anyone
would like to change their response based on the strengths and opportunities. If not
take the median value and move on to the next question.
- For those questions where there was no time for debate, record the median value.
- Once a consensus view has been reached for each question, enter the result in the
Results column of the GEC-SAT Consensus Spreadsheet.

If a question does not apply to your agency, you should select answer 1. GEC-SAT requires
one selection for every question.
GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 7 of 20
 It is preferable to complete the Assessment at one sitting, but if this proves to be impossible,
reach agreement with the Team Members on how and when the Assessment will be
completed.

Set the expectations of Team Members in preparation for receiving the GEC-SAT Score
Report. Emphasize that it is extremely difficult to score highly - see Figure 1. The main benefit
from the exercise will be the identification of your agency’s relative strengths and
opportunities rather than the score.

Send the completed GEC-SAT Consensus Spreadsheet including your answers to the
Facilitator Questions to DAP.

Warning – please do not attempt to calculate your agency’s self-assessment score from the
self-assessment responses. Each question response is allocated a different weighting based
on the opinion of an experienced panel of CPE assessors.. These weightings vary from
question to question, and therefore there is no simple method for your agency to calculate or
estimate your self-assessment score.

Figure 1 – Steps to Excellence

Steps to Excellence
650-1000
points

451-650 WORLD-
points CLASS
World class results
supported by highly
301-450 ADVANCED effective strategies,
systems and people.
points An industry leader
with strong results
in comparison to
benchmarks, and
151-300 MATURE effective strategies,
systems and people
points Good results in most
in most areas.
areas but
innovation/industry
leadership is
0-150 points PROGRESS lacking. Strategies,
Some good systems and people
practices but not an are not fully
STARTING organisational-wide benchmarked
cohesive approach and/or
Early stages of systematically
and results are
developing an improved.
moderate or not
effectively run
known in some
organisation
areas.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 8 of 20

 AFTER THE TEAM CONSENSUS MEETING

Within three months of DAP receiving your GEC-SAT Consensus Spreadsheet, a

confidential GEC-SAT Score Report will be sent to you. This Report will show your business
excellence score and graphically display your organization’s performance relative to the
Criteria and other agencies that have completed the assessment.

The GEC-SAT Score Report will explain how to interpret your results so that your agency can
use the information to determine what actions to undertake. Your Action Planning Team
should consist of the GEC-SAT Team Members and/or include other senior managers
involved in business planning.

At the Action Planning Meeting, concentrate on developing actions for those areas of highest
priority, and use information captured at the Team Consensus Meeting (e.g. on the Strengths
and Opportunities Form) to provide ideas for actions.

Action Planning should be integrated into your strategic planning process to ensure that
actions can be resourced and do not conflict with strategic actions that have already been
decided upon.

Once you have decided on your actions, plan for a re-assessment of your agency in a year’s
time.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 9 of 20

 CONSENSUS MEETING TIME-PLAN

CPE Item Comments

Number of questions to debate

Time for discussing strengths

Time allocated for questions

Actual time completed (e.g.

Total time allocated to Item

Time to complete Item by

Number of questions

and opportunities

(e.g.3.20pm)

3.21pm)
Senior Leadership 8

Governance and 6
Societal Responsibilities
Strategy Development 5

Strategy Implementation 4

Voice of the Citizen 4

Citizen Engagement 5

Measurement, Analysis, 5
and Improvement of
Organizational
Knowledge 5
Performance
Management,
Information, and
Human resource 4
Information Technology
Environment
Human resource 5
Engagement
Work Processes 5

Operational 4
Effectiveness
Service and Process 5
Results
Citizen-Focused Results 3

Human resource- 5
Focused Results
Leadership and 4
Governance Results
Financial , Sectoral and 3
Societal Results
TOTAL

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 10 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM - LEADERSHIP

Category: LEADERSHIP Item: SENIOR LEADERSHIP

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: LEADERSHIP Item: GOVERNANCE AND SOCIETAL RESPONSIBILITIES

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 11 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – STRATEGY

Category: STRATEGY Item: STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: STRATEGY Item: STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 12 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – CITIZENS

Category: CITIZENS Item: VOICE OF THE CITIZEN

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: CITIZENS Item: CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 13 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS,
AND KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

Category: MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS Item: MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS AND

& KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT OF AGENCY
PERFORMANCE
Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: MEASUREMENT, ANALYSIS Item: MANAGEMENT OF INFORMATION,

& KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT KNOWLEDGE AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 14 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – HUMAN RESOURCE FOCUS

Category: HUMAN RESOURCE FOCUS Item: HUMAN RESOURCE ENVIRONMENT

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: HUMAN RESOURCE FOCUS Item: HUMAN RESOURCE ENGAGEMENT

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 15 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – OPERATIONS FOCUS

Category: OPERATIONS FOCUS Item: WORK PROCESSES

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: OPERATIONS FOCUS Item: OPERATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 16 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – RESULTS

Category: RESULTS Item: SERVICE AND PROCESS RESULTS

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: RESULTS Item: CITIZEN -FOCUSED RESULTS

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: RESULTS Item: HUMAN RESOURCE-FOCUSED RESULTS

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 17 of 20

 STRENGTHS AND OPPORTUNITIES FORM – RESULTS

Category: RESULTS Item: LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE RESULTS

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

Category: RESULTS Item: FINANCIAL, SECTORAL AND SOCIETAL RESULTS

Strengths Opportunities for Improvement
(things we are doing well) (things we need to improve)

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 18 of 20

 FACILITATOR QUESTIONS

8. GENERAL QUESTIONS

(To be completed by your GEC-SAT Facilitator. Responses should be transferred to the GEC-SAT Consensus
Spreadsheet)

8.1 Tick the statement below that most accurately describes your agency’s experience in
undertaking business excellence assessments

1. This was our first business excellence self-assessment and the first time most of our assessment team
became aware of business excellence.
2. This was our first business excellence self-assessment although most of our assessment team already
had a good understanding of business excellence.
3. This was our first business excellence self-assessment although we have been assessed
independently by external assessors on business excellence in the last 5 years.
4. We have undertaken one or more previous business excellence self-assessments prior to this one in
the last 5 years. However, we have not been assessed independently by external assessors on
business excellence in the last 5 years.
5. We have undertaken one or more previous business excellence self-assessments prior to this one in
the last 5 years. In addition, we have been assessed independently by external assessors on business
excellence in the last 5 years.

8.2 How many people completed some or all of the self-assessment questionnaire?

1. One to two people.

2. Three to six people
3. Seven to twelve people
4. Thirteen to twenty people
5. Twenty one to forty people
6. More than forty people.

8.3 How many people attended the consensus meeting?

1. One to two people.

2. Three to six people
3. Seven to twelve people
4. Thirteen to twenty people
5. Twenty one to forty people
6. More than forty people.

8.4 How long was the consensus meeting?

1. One to two hours.

2. Three to five hours
3. Six to eight hours
4. Nine to twelve hours
5. Thirteen to sixteen hours
6. More than sixteen hours.

8.5 What were the job titles of the people involved in the self-assessment? (Tick as many as
required)

1. Executive Director/Managing Director/President/Head of Agency

2. Directors
3. Senior Managers/Senior Professionals
4. Middle Managers
5. Junior Managers/Supervisors
6. Division Chief/Technical Staff
7. Employees/Front-Line Staff.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 19 of 20

8.6 What was the average length of time for each Team Member to complete the questionnaire
and Strengths and Opportunities Forms (see responses to Section 8 of the Team Member’s
questionnaire)

1. 2 hours or less.
2. 2 to 3 hours.
3. 3 to 4 hours.
4. 4 to 5 hours.
5. 5 to 6 hours
6. More than 6 hours

8.7 Did your Team Members believe that the questionnaire length was about right to provide a
realistic assessment of your organization? Which response was most common? (see
responses to Section 8 of the Team Member’s questionnaire).

1. The questionnaire length is far too long (perhaps reduce by 30 questions)

2. The questionnaire length is too long (perhaps reduce by 10 questions)
3. The questionnaire length is about right, it’s been a good use of my time.
4. More questions (perhaps 10 more questions) are needed to investigate these topics, the time spent in
responding to them was worthwhile.
5. More questions (perhaps 30 or more questions) are needed to investigate these topics, the time spent
in responding to them was worthwhile.
6. More questions (perhaps 50 or more questions) are needed to investigate these topics, the time spent
in responding to them was worthwhile.

8.8 Which statement was the most common response concerning the clarity of the self-
assessment questions? (see responses to Section 8 of the Team Member’s questionnaire).

1. Many questions were difficult to understand or complete even after reading the guidance notes.
2. Some questions were difficult to understand or complete even after reading the guidance notes.
3. One or two questions were difficult to understand or complete even after reading the guidance notes.
4. No questions were difficult to understand or complete.

8.9 In your judgement, how valuable has the process of completing the self-assessment and
reaching consensus been for your agency?

1. No value
2. Low value
3. Moderate value
4. High value
5. Extremely valuable

8.10 How many employees work at your agency and were covered by this self-assessment?

1. Less than 10
2. Between 10 and 49
3. Between 50 and 99
4. Between 100 and 499.
5. Between 500 and 999
6. 1000 or above.

GEC-SAT Facilitators Guide – Page 20 of 20