From my perspective, the definition is incorrect.  The information object denotes the findings/recommendations/result/output of assessing something (eg, but not necessarily, a report or paper).  "Assessment" is a noun, which suggests technically the term should be OK (it is not a something like "process" which can be either a noun or a verb) although "assessment" has close associations with the verb (process) "assess".  Still, if anyone can identfy a clearer and better term for the object rather than "assessment" then, instead of simply updating the definition, so much the better!  

I think the Assessment is an information object, not an activity. In GSBPM terms it would be part of the output of the Evaluate phase.

I think we should see this issue together with issue 19. If we build quality into all of our subprocesses and not just phase 9 then

in addition to Process Metrics coming out of a subprocess then we we would also have Evaluation Assessments and Asessments.

Of course it is possible to think of these as Transformed outputs (they did not exist before the process and they are created by the process from

the input to the process), but if we treat Process Metrics as an important subtype of Process Output, then maybe an Assessment is also an important subtype.

Recommended Action: The definition needs to be fixed. It is not the activity but the result of activity.

Chris will provide some words. 

Following the CC on 16 July here are a couple of suggestions for an alternative defintion

Definition of Assessment

Date: 16 July 2013

Current Definition

“An activity to analyze quality or effectiveness and consider available options.”

Suggested Definitions

1. The result of the analysis of the quality and effectiveness of statistical processes and recommendations on how these can be improved
2. Metadata pertaining to the analysis of the quality and effectiveness of statistical processes and how these can be improved.