EFQM: A Three-Dimensional Approach to Designing Excellence Measures

Transcription

1 Amir Bolboli Dr. Markus Reiche Lean EFQM: A Three-Dimensional Approach to Designing Excellence Measures

2 Agenda 2

3 Background Effective implementation of EFQM can lead to short/long term performance improvement (Leicester Study on EFQM) Failure rate reported in recent studies: 60 % (Karani & Bichanga 2011) Lack of implementation know-how Difficulties for changing the culture 3

4 Background Culture change is extremely complicated (change of generation or ownership structure) Culture is a complex, cannot be holistically assessed (limiting to a particular target required) Organizations with different capability need to start at different steps 4

5 Background Today s business environment requires progressive improvement strategies with short reaction time EFQM implementation can be much easier and more effective if the selected measures demand less cultural change and are aligned to the organizational capability 5

6 Problem Statement Lack of know how for deriving measures from EFQM criteria using the RADAR logic EFQM Model Sustainable Excellence Corporate Culture It is not clear: which cultural dimensions are relevant for selecting EFQM measures how to integrate culture assessment in design of EFQM measures Maturity Level It is not clear: to which extend the organization is capable to work with EFQM contents which tools/aims to determine maturity level

7 Main objectives to propose a way to design EFQM measures based on the RADAR logic to develop an approach for selecting the firm specific EFQM measures based on the level of maturity and the existing culture Lean EFQM 7

8 EFQM Criteria Model 8

9 Fundamental Concepts of Excellence foundation for achieving sustainable excellence Guideline for top management 9

10 RADAR logic STRUCTURED APPROACH TO QUESTIONING THE PERFORMANCE Determine the Results it is aiming to achieve What are we trying to achieve? Assess and Refine the deployed approached based on monitoring and analysis of the results achieved and ongoing learning activities. AR: How do we measure whether it is working? What have we learning and what improvements can be made? Plan and develop an integrated set of Approaches to deliver the required results How do we try to achieve this? Deploy the approaches in a systematic way How / Where / When was this implemented? 10

11 Lack of concrete RADAR-based measures/ Break-down structure of EFQM criteria model EFQM Criterion 5 (Sub-criteria a,b,c,d,e) Processes, Products & Services EFQM Sub-criterion 5e (areas for assessment 1-5) Management of customer relationships EFQM Sub-criterion 5e4 Monitoring & review of customer experiences and perceptions to ensure appropriate respond to any feedback Concrete measures to realize the main focus (customer perception management) based on RADAR logic are missing! 11

12 Using RADAR for defining excellence measures 12

13 Requirements for culture assessment in the context of the EFQM design International scope without country-specific focus Categorization possibility (Scalability) Compatibility with EFQM contents Culture assessment for direction of the company Values or basic underlying assumptions as the basis of the assessment Simple application 13

14 Assessment of existing culture assessment approaches 15

15 Qualitative assessment of cultural dimensions (Münstermann 2011, Camern/Freemann 1991) in terms of importance for the culture based selection of EFQM measures The cultural dimension is highly relevant in the selection of EFQM measures. The cultural dimension has an average importance in the selection of EFQM measures. The cultural dimension has a low importance in the selection of EFQM measures. The cultural dimension is not relevant in the selection of EFQM measures. Six dimensions with high relevant to EFQM design have been selected 16

16 Excellence-oriented Culture assessment Model 1: Management Style 1a 1b 432 Culture types 6a 6b 6c 1c Artifacts values underlying assumptions 2c 2b 2a 5a 5b 4c 3b 3a 4b 4a 4: Organizational character 17

17 Management Style 1a. Cooperative management style (facilitator, mentor, team builder) 1b. Ad hoc management (risk-taking, promotion of innovation and creativity) 1c. Delegative leadership (focus on results) Error culture 2a. error openness, and fault tolerance, the errors are not discussed. 2b. errors are not communicated. they bring penalties with themselves. 2c. error friendliness. Errors are seen as an improvement opportunity and constructively discussed in order to learn from them. Information and communication 3a. open communication culture on most levels (between employees themselves and between managers and employees). With regard to the information gathering and dissemination-the whole company works as a team (very open information culture). 3b. closed communication and information culture on most levels. 18

18 Organizational character 4.a. The organization is a place where everyone feels accepted in person. It's like one big family. Employees have a lot in common and share a lot with each other. 4.b. The organization is very results-oriented. The staff are very ambitious and achievement-oriented. 4.c The organization is heavily controlled and well structured. Formal procedures governing what people have to do. Employee behavior 5.a. Most people find change processes negatively and oppose these processes 5.b. Most employees support the change processes and are involved according to their role and responsibilities (Barghorn 2010, p 100). Orientation of the company 6.a. Reliable service and properly initiated and implemented processes is referred as the company's success. 6.b. Success is defined in our more innovative and unique results (products, services). 6.c. Market gains are the essential basis for measuring the company's success. 19

19 Requirements for maturity assessment in the context of the EFQM design Understanding the eight basic concepts of EFQM and their application Determination of maturity level as the main goal of the assessment Defining the extent to which EFQM content can be detailed Scalability of assessment Simple application without the need of external support (low complexity) 20

20 Assessment of existing self-assessment approaches Requirements Assessment method (content) Simulation of external assessment (Criteria, Subcriteria, fundamental concepts, RADAR) Determination of organization s maturity Understanding & application of EFQM fundamental concepts Determination of detailing level of EFQM contents Scalability Simple application with low complexity Improvement matrix (nine criteria and 32 Sub-criteria) Internal assessment workshop (nine EFQM-Criteria) Questionnaire (eight fundamental concepts) Legend: not applicable partially applicable applicable 21

21 Maturity Assessment survey based on EFQM fundamental concepts 22

22 Conclusion Understanding of fundamental concepts Self-assessment by leaders Determination of maturity level Culture dimensions 1: Management Style 5: General orientation 6a 6b 6c 6: employee behavior 5a 5b 1a 1b 1c Artefacts values underlying assumptions 4c 4b 4a 2c 2b 3b 4: Organizational character 2: Error culture 2a 3a 3: Information- & Communication

23 Thank you for your attention 24