Quality Assurance and Moderation

Purpose

This summary explains how LII protects the quality and consistency of its assessment decisions. It sets out the commitments candidates and organisations can rely on. The detailed quality-assurance controls are maintained as controlled internal documents, because publishing them could compromise the integrity of assessment.

Scope

This summary applies to LII professional certification (CEL to CXL), Certified Young Leader, Programme Recognition and LEM Organisational Accreditation.

Our commitments

Every decision is quality-assured. Each decision is subject to defined quality-assurance controls before it is issued. Professional certification decisions are ratified by LII's Standards Committee. Every LEM decision is quality-reviewed before issue.

Independent moderation. Specified categories of decision, including higher-risk decisions, are independently reviewed by a second LII-appointed assessor who took no part in the original assessment. LII also reviews samples of completed decisions.

Independent assessors. Assessors are independent of the people and organisations they assess. Assessment panels include at least one assessor with no earlier involvement in the case. See the Conflict of Interest Standard.

Calibrated assessors. Assessors meet LII's assessor standards and take part in calibration before they assess and at regular intervals, so that the same standard is applied by every assessor.

Consistency over time. LII's Standards Committee monitors assessment outcomes and reviews completed decisions to detect and correct any drift in standards across assessors and over time. It reports to LII's Governance Board.

Explainable decisions. Every decision must be explainable by reference to the evidence and the published standard. LII keeps a complete record of each assessment. Candidates may request access to their own assessment record, subject to data-protection law and the confidentiality of any witness who has asked for it.

Human decisions. AI tools may support administrative and checking tasks. AI never makes or recommends a readiness outcome, a grade, a certification or an accreditation decision.

Independent appeals and complaints. Appeals are heard by people who took no part in the original decision. Complaints are handled separately from appeals. See the Complaints and Appeals Policy.

What LII maintains internally

The detailed controls behind these commitments are maintained as controlled internal documents. They include moderation triggers, sampling methods, boundary and calibration criteria, reference scores, assessor performance controls and escalation routes. They are applied under the oversight of the Standards Committee and the Governance Board.

Status of this public edition

This public edition states the requirements communicated to candidates and users of LII certification. LII maintains more detailed controlled documents for assessment administration and quality assurance. Those documents must be consistent with this public edition. If LII identifies a material inconsistency between this public edition and a controlled document, the inconsistency is resolved before the disputed provision is relied on in any assessment decision. No requirement is applied retrospectively to a candidate.

Related public documents

• Leadership Certification Framework
• Assessment and Evidence Principles
• Conflict of Interest Standard
• Complaints and Appeals Policy