Guidelines for formally evaluating the external environment of a university are presented. The guidelines are evaluated and refined on the basis of results of an experimental environmental assessment effort at a large research university. Eleven critical tensions associated with environmental assessment are also discussed, along with theoretical and applied implications. In addition eight constraints on formal environmental analysis are discussed. An environmental assessment experiment at University of Minnesota in 1983 was undertaken to promote institutional planning. Information was collected and disseminated on general environmental issues, but without action recommendations. These efforts were qualitatively evaluated with attention to the following questions: Should universities formally assess their external environments? What should be assessed? Who should do the assessing? How should the assessment effort be organized? What should be produced? Critical tensions in environmental assessment include: credibility versus quality, issue management versus issue identification and analysis, interpretation versus information, diversity versus homogeneity, and process versus products. (SW)