SC21-Business-Excellence-Process-Overview-v6.pdf

SC21 Development & Performance

SC21 Det Ex Issue 06 June 2011

1

SC21 Determining Excellence Issue 06 June 2011

Process Overview

Prepared by:- The SC21 Development and Performance Special Interest Group



2

LIST OF CONTENTS Section Page

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................................... 3

2 SCOPE................................................................................................................................ 3

3 ASSESSMENT APPROACH .............................................................................................. 3

3.1 Determining Excellence....................................................................................................... 3

3.2 Excellence Model assessment ..………………………………………………………………….3

3.3 SC21 approach

4 DETERMINING EXCELLENCE PROCESS OVERVIEW.................................................... 4

4.1 Process Flow....................................................................................................................... 4

4.2 Launch meeting ................................................................................................................... 5

4.3 Determining Excellence Questionnaire given to Organisation............................................. 5

4.4 Organisation completes Questionnaire................................................................................ 5

4.5 Questionnaire returned to Assessment Team Leader ......................................................... 5

4.6 Assessment Team analyses Questionnaire......................................................................... 6

4.7 Workshop at Organisation facility ........................................................................................ 6

4.8 Feedback ............................................................................................................................ 7

4.9 Comparable Excellence Score ............................................................................................ 7

5 SCORING............................................................................................................................ 8

5.1 Scoring guidelines ............................................................................................................... 8

5.2 Scoring Rationale ................................................................................................................ 9

5.3 Final Score

6 PRACTITIONERS ............................................................................................................... 9

APPENDIX A

Determining Excellence questions versus Excellence Model sub-criteria....................…………10

APPENDIX B

Determining Excellence assessment v Full Excellence Model assessment.................…………11

APPENDIX C

Practitioner Capability Profile .......................................................................................…………13



3

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The methodology used in the SC21 Business Excellence Assessment is based on the EFQM Excellence Model. A|D|S acknowledges the EFQM copyright and is grateful for the permission granted to reproduce the EFQM Model within this document.

The general approach that has been agreed with EFQM is that if one copy only of the questionnaire is provided, the maximum number of people working from this single copy to be 3 persons in total. Further copies to be provided based on maximum of 3 people sharing one copy.

2 SCOPE

The purpose of this document is to provide guidance and awareness to individuals involved in the deployment of Determining Excellence. It is applicable to either Practitioners delivering the assessment or to organisation representatives receiving the assessment.

3 ASSESSMENT APPROACH 3.1 Determining Excellence

The Determining Excellence Questionnaire was developed by the EFQM as a means for an organisation to perform a self assessment against the Excellence Model. This will provide an organisation with a view of its strengths and areas for improvement.

The Questionnaire consists of 49 questions which may not give a complete picture of an organisation’s positioning against the Excellence Model but does provide a useful starting point and indicator for subsequent activities.

Participating companies should be provided with a copy of EFQM brochure:- EFQM Determining Excellence: ISBN: 978- 90-5236-542-8

3.2 Excellence Model assessment

An assessment against the Excellence Model with the associated RADAR® logic and Fundamental Concepts, ensures that all the management practices used by an organisation form a coherent system that is continually improved and delivers the intended strategy for the organisation. Participating companies to be provided with a copy of EFQM brochure:- EFQM Excellence Model: ISBN 978-90-5236-501-5

3.3 SC21 approach

Determining Excellence completed as self-assessment by the organisation with a workshop facilitated by SC21 accredited Practitioners is the recommended SC21 approach to assess an organisation against the EFQM Excellence Model, ref figure 1.

Further guidance on when to conduct a full Excellence Model assessment in preference to Determining Excellence is given in Appendix B.



4

Figure 1.

4 BUSINESS EXCELLENCE PROCESS OVERVIEW 4.1 Process Flow



5

4.2 Launch meeting

The Assessment Team Leader will give a presentation to the organisation’s management team. The presentation should cover:-

• An overview of the EFQM Excellence Model.

• SC21 use of the Determining Excellence questionnaire.

• Suggestions for self assessment – number of people to be involved, how to develop a consensus position against the 49 questions.

• Explanation of the scoring.

• Agree date to return the self-assessment scoring to Assessment Team Leader.

• Agree a date for the facilitated workshop where the Assessment Team will to review the scoring with the management team.

• Delivery of the Feedback report of Strengths and Areas for Improvement and a comparable Excellence score.

• The Organisation is given the questionnaire as a booklet.

Note:

• The Assessment Team must include a qualified Lead Practitioner as recognised by the SC21 Development and Performance Special Interest Group.

4.3 Determining Excellence Questionnaire given to Organisation

This will typically occur at the Launch/Positioning meeting at the organisation’s facility.

Note: There is a copyright clause prohibiting reproduction electronically through photocopy or otherwise of the Questionnaire. The Determining Excellence Questionnaire can be purchased via the EFQM, reference: ISBN 978-90-5236-542-8.

4.4 Organisation completes Questionnaire

It is recommended that a minimum of 3 from the organisation’s management team complete the questionnaire, either together or individually and then through consensus agree a final view. This is important to ensure that managers have a common view of the organisation’s position against the Excellence Model and their strengths and areas for improvement.

4.5 Questionnaire returned to Assessment Team Leader

The Organisation is requested to return the completed questionnaire (or to state scoring per individual question) by the agreed date.



6

4.6 Assessment Team analyses questionnaire

The Assessment team will review the scoring against each question and identify areas for further discussion during the assessment visit.

E.g. for a score of “A” in Leadership question 1, one would expect enablers to be in place to demonstrate how Leaders:-

• Set and communicate a clear direction and strategic focus of the organisation’s core purpose and objectives.

• Define and communicate the overall vision, values, ethics and corporate behaviour.

• Champion the organisation’s values and are role models for integrity, social responsibility and ethical behaviour.

• Foster organisational development through shared values, ethics and a culture of trust.

• Develop a shared leadership culture for the organisation and review and improve the effectiveness of leadership behaviours.

The above bullets are what an experienced Practitioner would expect to be clearly demonstrated in a ‘Fully Achieved’ approach for RADAR® score of >75% and hence aligned to a score “A”. A score of “A” indicates an outstanding approach, deployment and assessment & review for which there is little or no scope for improvement.

4.7 Workshop at Organisation facility

The assessment at the Organisation facility is essentially a discussion to understand the background to the scoring. It is recommended that, at minimum, 2 Practitioners attend the workshop to provide a consensus view.

The discussion will be in a meeting room ideally with access to the Organisation’s intranet, as this can be used by the Organisation to describe the approaches.

It is recommended that a brief tour of the facility is arranged – check for notice boards with relevant Organisation and people information and up to date metrics. Get a feel for the culture of the business by chatting to employees met during the tour.

Go through the questions by Criteria one-by-one checking for ‘evidence’ or confidence that the enablers and results are in place.

In some cases the Organisation will have scored themselves higher than that merited, the example above in 4.6 regarding an “A” score in Leadership Q1 may need the Practitioner to align the score to the Excellence Model and RADAR®, i.e. ‘clear evidence or evidence’ rather than ‘comprehensive evidence’ and hence a score of “B or C”. Of course, the Organisation may also underplay the score and need to be scored higher.

The important point is that the Practitioners are the experts on the Excellence Model and will use their experience effectively through deployment of the Determining Excellence Questionnaire.

The Enabler questions in Determining Excellence mainly address the Approach so the Practitioner will need to consider how Deployment, Assessment and Review are addressed. In “Results“ the questions do address trends, targets, comparisons and scope and to a lesser extent causes.



7

With 5 Enabler criteria comprising 25 questions and Results comprising 24 questions – time will need to be well managed to get a good understanding on strengths and opportunities, particularly if the assessment is to be completed in one day. As in a full assessment Results should be relatively quick to assess – scope, trends, targets, comparisons and cause are easily verified.

It is recommended that Practitioners refer to the EFQM Excellence Model to ratify scores and to base Strengths and Areas for Improvement for feedback to the organisation.

Note: Appendix A has a cross reference table of Determining Excellence Questions versus Excellence Model sub-criteria, e.g. Leadership Q3 relates to sub-criteria 1c.

4.8 Feedback

Feedback will be an Overview Presentation and Score and a Detailed report.

Overview Presentation and Score

Feedback timing will be agreed by the Lead Practitioner and the Organisation – on the day, the next day or at another agreed date.

The Assessment team will prepare a PowerPoint presentation as feedback of Strengths and Areas for Improvement as ‘Key Themes’ and the comparable Excellence Model Score.

As a guide – scores of “A” or “B” are indicators of strengths, scores of “C” can be developed or deployed further and scores of “D” and “E” are indicators of Areas for Improvement which can be summarised under their Criteria.

The information within the feedback will provide input for the Organisation’s Continuous Sustainable Improvement Plan (CSIP).

Detail Report

The detailed assessment report will be prepared by the Assessment Team, the Lead Practitioner will collate the final version for transmission to the Organisation.

The report should be segmented by criterion and contain the agreed scoring (A, B, C, D or E) of each question together with Strengths, Comments (to address scores of C) and Areas for Improvement by criterion.

The Report will finish with the summary of scores by criterion and the comparable Excellence Model Score.

The Feedback Report should be sent to the Organisation within two weeks of the workshop.

4.9 Comparable Excellence Model Score

The Organisation must be advised that this score is derived and used under the SC21 supply chain development framework and is indicative of a score against the Excellence Model. A score for Industry benchmarking and recognition by EFQM would need to have been derived by a full assessment against the EFQM Excellence Model.



8

5 SCORING 5.1 Scoring Guidelines

Scoring the questionnaire is a challenging task. EFQM have defined 5 scoring levels for each question. This encourages a speedy assessment due to the increment between each level.

The scoring is shown below as noted in the EFQM Determining Excellence booklet with some additional guidelines for an SC21 Practitioner.

Enablers

Level Factor EFQM SC21 guidelines

A 75 Approaches being fully deployed and embedded

• An outstanding approach that can be considered to be best practice.

• Is clearly demonstrated as part of the improvement culture. • Has been in place across the organisation for greater than 3 years.

• Regular proactive reviews of the approach and its deployment. B 50 Approaches

deployed in most areas

• Evidence that this approach is well addressed. • Has been in place for a minimum of 2 years. • Perhaps not deployed in all areas to the same extent. • Periodic reviews and actions taken for further enhancement.

C 25 Approaches partially deployed

• Evidence that this approach is addressed. • Improvement activity in place for a minimum of 12 months. • Random reviews with specific actions for improvement.

D 10 Ad hoc Approaches implemented

• An approach is being prepared. • Some evidence of improvement activity.

E 0 No Approach • No real activity but some good ideas which can be developed and progressed.

Results

Level Factor EFQM SC21 guidelines

A 75 Results comparing favourably against best-in-class organisations

• Results presented and relevant for all key areas for greater than 3 years.

• Performance of results clearly demonstrate the benefits of the enablers.

• Targets achieved for all key results. • Results compare favourably with best-in-class organisations.

B 50 Results performing well against target

• Key results are identified and measured for a minimum of 2 years.

• Positive trends or sustained performance on most key results. • Achievement of targets and favourable comparisons for most key results.

C 25 Data collected for all relevant areas

• Key results are identified and measured over the last 12 months.

• Positive trends on some key results. • Targets and comparisons achieved for some key results.

D 10 Data collected for some relevant areas

• Some results are identified and measured. • Trends, targets and comparisons are being established.

E 0 No data collected • No real activity, perhaps some data but not gathered or analysed in a structured way.



9

5.2 Scoring rationale

The scoring increments in the Determining Excellence booklet and those agreed for SC21 use are defined in the table below :- A B C D E EFQM 100 75 50 25 0 SC21 75 50 25 10 0 It was found to be necessary to use a reduced scoring system in order to align to scores achieved from a full assessment against the ‘Excellence Model’ using the RADAR® scoring logic and to maintain benchmarking against existing scores. It is considered that this reduced scoring better supports the expected SC21 thresholds or guidelines for each level. Note: Determining Excellence is used as an indicator for improvement activity, accordingly scores of “A” should be rare. Businesses that do score “A” would be advised to deploy a full Excellence Model assessment as noted in 3.2.

5.3 Final Score

Once the scores in each Category have been multiplied by the Factoring (0, 10, 25, 50, 75) and summed the total is divided by 49 (the number of questions) to give a percentage achievement. This achievement figure multiplied by 1000 (Maximum Excellence Score) is the comparable Excellence Model Score. See the example below.

Criterion E D C B A1 Leadership 2 32 Policy & Strategy 3 23 People 3 24 Partnerships & Resources 1 2 25 Processes 3 26 Customer Results 2 3 1 17 People Results 1 2 28 Society Results 2 2 19 Key Performance Results 2 3 2

Number of ticks 5 10 20 14 0

Factor 0 10 25 50 75

Value 0 100 500 700 0

Total Divided by 49 = % achievement

Which is a comparable Excellence Model Score of 265

13000.265



10

6 PRACTITIONERS The term “Practitioner” is used in preference to the traditional term “Assessor”.

The SC21 approach is that “Practitioner” better describes those who will provide support and guidance to an organisation in developing or supplementing their CSIP.

Lead Practitioners and Practitioners must be accredited by SC21 Performance and Toolkits SIG (Special Interest Group).

Information on Practitioner accreditation is shown in Appendix C.



11

APPENDIX A – DETERMINING EXCELLENCE QUESTIONS VERSUS EXCELLENCE MODEL SUB-CRITERIA

ENABLERS RESULTS

Question Sub-criterion Question Sub-criterion

Leadership 1 1a Customer Results 1 6a scope

Leadership 2 1b Customer Results 2 6a trends

Leadership 3 1c Customer Results 3 6b scope

Leadership 4 1d Customer Results 4 6b trends / targets

Leadership 5 1e Customer Results 5 6a/6b comparisons

Strategy 1 2a Customer Results 6 6a/6b segmentation

Strategy 2 2b Customer Results 7 6a causes

Strategy 3 2b People Results 1 7a scope

Strategy 4 2d People Results 2 7a causes

Strategy 5 2d People Results 3 7a trends / targets

People 1 3a People Results 4 7b scope / trends / targets

People 2 3b People Results 5 7a/7b comparisons

People 3 3c Society Results 1 8a scope

People 4 3d Society Results 2 8b targets / causes / scope

People 5 3e Society Results 3 8b targets / causes / scope

Partnerships & Resources 1 4a Society Results 4 8a/8b trends / targets

Partnerships & Resources 2 4e Society Results 5 8a/8b comparisons

Partnerships & Resources 3 4b Key Results 1 9a scope / trends

Partnerships & Resources 4 4c Key Results 2 9a comparisons

Partnerships & Resources 5 4d Key Results 3 9a segmentation

Processes 1 5a Key Results 4 9b scope

Processes 2 5b Key Results 5 9a/9b trends / targets

Processes 3 5a Key Results 6 9a/9b comparisons

Processes 4 5d Key Results 7 9b scope / trends / comparisons

Processes 5 5e



12

APPENDIX B - DETERMINING EXCELLENCE ASSESSMENT versus FULL EXCELLENCE MODEL ASSESSMENT

Determining Excellence completed as a self-assessment by the organisation with a workshop facilitated by SC21 accredited Practitioners is the recommended SC21 approach to assess an organisation against the EFQM Excellence Model, ref figure 1.

Benefits

• Determining Excellence is an EFQM publication and can be considered to indicate best practice.

• Straightforward for an organisation to use – an overview at the Launch meeting usually being sufficient to get things started.

• Can readily involve many people within the organisation. • Enables the organisation to receive feedback which can be segmented by function. • Strengths and Opportunities are generated in line with the Excellence Model and provide

a useful starting point and indicator for improvement activities. • Resources – Takes less people resources compared with a full EFQM Excellence Model

assessment both for the organisation involved and the assessment team. • Provides a simple means to introduce the Excellence philosophy as an enabler for

Continuous Improvement. • When used in parallel with a Workshop it provides an independency in approach.

Dependencies or disadvantages

• Needs commitment and consensus from those completing the self assessment on behalf of the Organisation.

• May not represent shop floor views. • Does not fully address Deployment, Assessment and Review or Cause within the

RADAR® Scoring Matrix. • Does not allow direct comparison with scoring profiles of Award applicants.

Guidance for full Excellence Model assessment

Organisations scoring 400 or above may get limited benefit from the Determining Excellence approach and would be encouraged to complete a full assessment against the EFQM Excellence Model. This will better highlight strengths and identify areas for improvement through an in depth deployment of the RADAR® Scoring Matrix applied to all 32 Model sub-criteria.

• Small to Medium sized Enterprises (SME, less than 250 employees) to be recognised for Silver SC21 award would be encouraged to complete a full EFQM Excellence Model assessment.

• An organisation of greater than 250 employees to be recognised for Silver SC21 award must complete a full EFQM Excellence Model assessment.



13

• All organisations to be recognised for Gold SC21 award must complete a full EFQM Excellence Model assessment. Gold SC21 award winners will be role models for Excellence, accordingly an in depth assessment against the Excellence Model is required to validate this level of recognition.

If it has been agreed to conduct a full Excellence Model assessment, the Lead Practitioner will describe how a ‘submission’ can be prepared by the organisation. This submission is used for initial assessment against the Excellence Model and is supported by a facilitated workshop.



14

APPENDIX C – PRACTITIONER CAPABILITY PROFILE

Guide

This information below provides guidance on the experience, qualifications and attributes that would be expected for a SC21 Business Excellence Practitioner.

A Practitioner will be ‘sponsored’ by an existing accredited SC21 Lead Practitioner who will complete the Capability Matrix at the end of this guide and submit to the SC21 Development & Performance SIG for approval.

Role:

Being a Business Excellence Practitioner is not merely a “technical” exercise but is a demanding task requiring a balance of excellent interpersonal and operational skills coupled with a commitment to timely and professional performance.

The principle roles of a SC21 Business Excellence Practitioner will include the following:-

• Contribute to the development and implementation of the SC21 National Status Report. • Participation in the launch and subsequent deployment of a Business Excellence diagnostic

assessment. • Preparation of the feedback report of Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement as inputs

for the organisation’s Continuous Sustainable Improvement Plan (CSIP). • Provide guidance in developing a CSIP. • Ensure that best practice is captured during the diagnostic activity and any lessons learned

are communicated to the Development & Performance SIG. • Have a working knowledge and practice in other SC21 diagnostics – AS EN 9100, Nadcap,

Manufacturing Excellence and Relationship Management. • Understand how organisations operate and are able to take an overall view of performance.

Experience

EFQM Assessor level training either:-

• Having undergone and passed an EFQM European Assessor Training® Competency Assessment.

• Has completed EFQM Assessor level training through either a) a European Assessor training course, b) EFQM licensed trainers and consultants, c) SC21 Development & Performance SIG approved course. Typically this involves assessing a case study against the Excellence Model and participating in a 2/3 day workshop of:- o advanced understanding of the EFQM Excellence Model o scoring using the RADAR matrix o understanding the organisation being assessed o identifying key themes o reaching consensus o the basis of site visits and o preparing and delivering feedback reports and presentation



15

Practical experience in the deployment of the EFQM Excellence Model®.

• Fully understand the EFQM Excellence Model® and score consistently. • Assessment experience, having participated as a BEM assessor with demonstrated

application. • Managerial experience, ideally in more than one operational area (e.g. Production, Support,

Technical, Quality). • Several years’ experience associated with suppliers and their management and

development to provide an understanding of underlying process issues and their improvement. In addition, it is of paramount importance that the individual has a practical understanding of the problems which poor delivery and equipment serviceability causes in both the technical and commercial sense.

Qualifications

• Educated to degree standard in science, engineering, or a related discipline or/ • Educated to HND, HNC or equivalent standard or/ • Completed an apprenticeship in a manufacturing / engineering / service industry.

Additional Qualities

• Become capable in the deployment of other SC21 Workstreams (eg Manufacturing Excellence, Relationship Management) to support fellow Practitioners.

• A broad knowledge and experience of management processes. • Written and verbal fluency in the English language. • An achiever in respect of business objectives. • Self-motivated, flexible professional. • Can gather, assimilate and analyse evidence to make insightful judgements. • Can produce and give clear, accurate and relevant feedback. • The identification of improvement opportunities in respect of short, medium and long term

requirements.

Lead Practitioner

In addition to the above.

• Co-ordinate against SC21 National Status Report the Launch and deployment of the Business Excellence diagnostic assessment, using the trained multi-functional resources from the SC21 Community.

• As team leader, is responsible for ensuring the multi-functional team drawn from across the SC21 community operate efficiently and perform to realise the agreed objectives.

• Ensure that motivation, team spirit and focus on objectives are applied consistently in order to maximise team contribution to the SC21 Programme and benefit to the organisation being assessed.

• Provide appropriate training and mentoring for assessment personnel and accreditation as Practitioner or Lead Practitioner.

• Ensure the process remains current and in line with EFQM best practice and recommend changes accordingly.



16

Accreditation

The SC21 approach is that Assessors may be better described as Practitioners who will provide support and guidance to a Company in developing or supplementing their CSIP.

Lead Practitioners and Practitioners must be accredited by SC21 Development and Performance SIG.

The Practitioner Capability Matrix is shown below.

Lead Practitioner must be all “High”.

Practitioner can be a mix of “High” and Medium” as determined by the ‘sponsoring’ Lead Practitioner.

It is important that Practitioners are active in conducting assessments. Accordingly, Practitioners who have not conducted assessments for say 3 years would be required to undergo a shadow assessment to ensure they continue to meet the standard and are able to provide valued feedback to the organisation.


SC21 Det Ex

Issue 06 June 2011

17

Nam

e

EFQM Awareness

2/3 Day EFQM accredited Training course

Shadow Assessment

Lead Assessment

Assessments conducted

EFQM 2010 gap training

Knowledge of EFQM Excellence Model

Carries out Bus Ex preparation and launch

Conducts Determining Excellence Workshop

Delivers feedback presentation and detail report

Reviews and supports CSIP

Date

Detail

Lead Practitioner/Trainer

Training

High

Low

• Limited know

ledge or understanding

• Has an aw

areness of the Criteria and

process

• Fam

iliar with som

e criteria but not

able to articulate or present any

material

• No or little experience in deploym

ent

• Would be recognised as subject

specialist

• Role model in dem

onstrating the

Criteria and process

• Can coach, train and develop others

in use of the process

• Attended recognised training course,

good understanding of C

riteria and

process

• Leads deployment of the process

linking with other assessm

ents and

associated activities

• Can provide support and present on

Criteria and process

• Som

e experience in application and

deployment

• Som

e supervision required when

deploying the process

• Supervision required when deploying

the process

Guidelines

Guidelines

SC21 Business Excellence Practitioner accreditation

Experience

• Proven experience in deploym

ent

Guidelines

Medium

• Can discuss at reasonable level of

detail

Dou

ble click this icon

for the above template, an exam

ple of typical con

tent is also show

n.H:\D back up\SC21

SC21-Business-Excellence-Process-Overview-v6.pdf

Documents

Transcript of SC21-Business-Excellence-Process-Overview-v6.pdf