Two different questions
| Internal audit | Self-assessment | |
|---|---|---|
| Its question | Is the requirement met? | How mature are we in this area? |
| Its output | Conformity / nonconformity plus findings | A maturity level |
| Independence | Required | Done by the organisation itself |
| Evidence | Required | May rest on assertion |
| Used for | Conformity and corrective action | Trend, prioritisation, roadmap |
The weak point of self-assessment
An organisation assessing itself sees itself, even in good faith, as better than it is. A serious self-assessment therefore caps the claim with evidence: a score given without asking “do you have the record that carries this level?” is an opinion, not a measurement.
How they work together
- The self-assessment surfaces weak areas and sets the priority of the audit programme.
- The audit produces evidence-based findings in those areas.
- Closing those findings shows, at the next self-assessment, whether the level has genuinely risen.
Which, and when
For an organisation new to a management system, a self-assessment is valuable for building a roadmap. Once the system is established the weight shifts to internal audit, and the self-assessment remains an annual measure of trend.