This paper reports the outcomes of a School of Law project undertaken in response to issues arising during the implementation of an institutional criterion-referenced assessment policy. The project involved the development of a set of generic assessment criteria and standards, or rubric, which could be customized to the requirements of individual law subjects. Of significance are the key decisions that shaped the generic resource and additional outcomes or byproducts of the project which include the professional learning experienced by individual members of the project working party and the identification of mutually reinforcing relationships between criterion-referenced assessment practice and other institutional policies and priorities. The paper concludes that analysis of project processes can produce findings whose value and significance are of equal interest to those resulting from implementation studies. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.)