Embracing Excellence in Education. A summary of the learning gained from applying the EFQM Excellence Model in Further and Higher Education

Transcription

1 Embracing Excellence in Education A summary of the learning gained from applying the EFQM Excellence Model in Further and Higher Education Consortium for Excellence in Higher Education 1

2 Enablers People People Leadership Policy & Strategy Processes Customer Key Performance Partnerships & Resources Society Innovation and Learning This publication has been written as way of sharing learning from practical experiences within the Higher and Further Education sectors. It does not review the concepts from an academic theory perspective, but introduces the management practices and learning which have emerged from detailed practical research undertaken within the sector. This is one in a series of publications that have been produced to share the learning from our work, in both a practical and strategic way. The other publications cover the following topics: Published on behalf of Sheffield Hallam University. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be produced in any form without the permission of the copyright owner. The views expressed in this publication are those of the particular contributors concerned, and are not necessarily shared by Sheffield Hallam University or any other contributor. Applying self-assessment against the EFQM Excellence Model in Further and Higher Education Benchmarking Methods and Experiences Linking the Excellence Model to other Management Models and Tools Organisational Learning and the Future of Higher Education Application of the EFQM Excellence Model in a College of Further Education.

3 Executive Summary This report summarises the key learning gained from a 3 year national research and evaluation programme which has tested the introduction and embedding of the EFQM Excellence Model and concepts of excellence in further and higher education. A number of significant issues have emerged which are congruent with the focus now being given by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) on Leadership, Management and Government. It has been shown that the Excellence Model is wholly appropriate and beneficial within both Higher Education (HE) and Further Education (FE) contexts, leading to the development of enhanced management practices across both academic and administrative areas. It is clear however, from the research undertaken, that the Excellence Model is a catalyst for change providing a framework through which improvement and changes in current practice can be analysed, prioritised and understood. Other management tools and techniques, such as the Balanced Scorecard and Investors in People, can be used synergistically to support the development of particular improvement areas. It has also been shown that the successful introduction and embedding of the Model concepts is dependant on senior management commitment and drive, and the existence of an institutional culture which is open and responsive to change. The Excellence Model is a framework that embodies a Europeanwide assessment of what constitutes good management practice. It has been developed, using input from over 1000 individuals and organisations from across Europe, and has benefited from benchmarking with the United States National Malcolm Baldrige Award scheme, the Japanese Deming Prize and quality management frameworks from South Africa and Australasia. The Model framework has been continually reviewed and updated, the most recent changes being published earlier in It is non-prescriptive framework that enables any type of organisation to customise it for its own use. It provides a framework for organisational self-reflection and learning as well as providing a pointer to what an organisation can do to improve its overall performance and the services it provides to its key stakeholders. Significantly, there are a number of key themes that have emerged. The need for leadership recognition, understanding and commitment to the development of a holistic approach to excellence. The development of leadership and management capabilities and competencies, particularly in the areas of process thinking, integrated performance management, culture change, understanding stakeholder needs and setting strategic direction. The need for an integrated performance management approach which integrates both academic and administrative/business planning in a co-ordinated way, supporting a continuous improvement ethos. Linked to this is a need for the setting of key performance indicators which track and monitor performance from both a perception base (such as staff and student surveys) and performance indicator base (such as student numbers, staff absence and financial data). The Excellence Model provides a stimulus to benchmark performance against other comparators and competitors. The need for institutions to adopt a process, as well as the traditional hierarchical, way of thinking is beginning to become recognised. Through this a greater clarity of processes across institutions can be achieved, with the distinction being drawn between those that are student and customer facing, those that are enabling or provide the infrastructure and those that provide governance and direction setting. Processes can themselves be assessed to determine their relative efficiency and effectiveness and prioritised for improvement. The recognition of the importance of partnership working and co-operation, where a culture of trust and mutually beneficial working relationships needs to be nurtured and developed both within and between organisations. This is particularly significant when considered in the context of process improvement and development. In most of the pilot areas we have found that a lack of trust leads to poor working relationships between the academic areas, faculties and schools, and the central administrative departments. This can be the root cause of complaints about bureaucracy and lack of internal customer focus. Around all of these issues there is also a need to recognise, celebrate and nurture the culture of the organisation and the individuals within it, building a flexible but trusting workforce committed to the concepts of excellence. The Excellence Model is therefore a system in which other models, frameworks, theories and concepts are nested. Its application, introduced through flexible self-assessment methodologies, is one way of unlocking the potential which enables a journey towards excellence to be followed. The Excellence Model provides a framework for enabling institutions to build management capacity and capability. 1

4 Contents Executive Summary Contents Foreword Background and Context Background and context The growing use of the Excellence Model in the Public Sector.4 3 The benefits of introducing the Excellence Model Introducing Excellence Introduction Putting quality into context The evolution of Excellence Defining and understanding Excellence and its concepts Introducing the EFQM Excellence Model The RADAR Concept The Excellence Model and other management models and tools The Excellence Model as a benchmarking tool Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A Catalyst for Change Introduction Accessing the EFQM Excellence Model and unlocking its potential Integrating for Excellence: Managing Institutional Change Introduction Developing institutional structure and culture The toolkit approach, led by the EFQM Excellence Model Conclusions Overall conclusions Synopsis of key learning points Overview analysis of achievement against the programme.... objectives Further Work and beyond Appendices Overview and description of the GMP143 Programme Outline of each project within the GMP143 Programme Summary of outputs and outcomes from the GMP143 Programme Further background on the evolution of excellence List of Figures and Tables Glossary Using self-assessment as part of a co-ordinated improvement.. process The link to planning sustainable integration The benefits of overcoming the challenges and barriers Summary Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential Introduction Developing leadership and management capabilities and competencies The move towards a process orientation The significance of partnerships and co-operation Key Performance Indicators are we really measuring excellence? Integrated performance management bringing together.... academic and administrative planning

5 Foreword Through the HEFCE Good Management Practice programme, we invested 250,000 in this project. It pioneers the implementation of the EFQM Excellence Model and specifically tailors the model for the needs of the higher education sector. Implementing the EFQM model requires a great deal of work - but many organisations report that it delivers significant benefits, well in excess of the original investment of time and financial resource. An organisation must make its own decision on whether this is the best approach for them to achieve business improvement. For universities and colleges this project enables that decision to be better informed. A great strength of this project has been the commitment of, and collaboration between, the partners from further education, higher education, government and commerce. Collaborative projects are complex to deliver and project management by Sheffield Hallam University, who led the project, has been exemplary. HEFCE welcomes this publication, which enables the knowledge and experience gained from this important project to be shared. Steve Egan Director, Finance and Corporate Resources Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) 3

6 Background and Context 1 Background and context The Government has a strategic and operational agenda for the public sector that is requiring organisations to move more deeply into a performance management culture. The direction is set out in the Modernising Government White Paper, which describes initiatives such as Best Value and Better Quality Services. The Cabinet Office has promoted the use of the Excellence Model in the Public Sector since The education and health sectors are seen as priority areas where performance management must be improved. Pressure is therefore growing for the higher education sector to adopt an approach which will support and nurture continuous improvement and organisational change in a holistic way. Although many institutions across the sector have embraced change, viewing it as necessary and relevant, there are still challenges to be faced if the HE and FE sectors are to strive for global levels of excellence: The clash between collegiality and managerialism and the perceived threat to academic freedoms that any management or business methodologies may bring, have given rise to cultural challenges and an evaluation of just what HE and FE are about. Changes in funding from the Government are providing greater financial challenges, requiring institutions to seek additional support from other public, private or partnership sources in order to make the investment in staff, equipment and infrastructure to support their aspirations for excellence. Challenging targets being set for widening participation within the context of a challenging resource base add additional pressures if institutions are to improve access, support and delivery of its services to a widening diversity of students. Globalisation of the market place, with other countries now competing in the same international markets. An increasing use of IT enabled systems and the concept of e-learning has also given rise to stronger competition in a range of national and international markets, opening up the opportunity for people to study in ways in which FE and HE may traditionally not have been able to support. Competition from other organisations entering the higher education market by developing company based learning environments for large workforces provides a threat to the higher education sector. A wider spectrum of motivation, expectation, study skills and intellectual ability among the student population, provides diverse needs that must be met in a cost-effective manner. An increasing demand from employers for graduates with a broader set of skills, particularly in terms of communication and other soft skills. A shifting emphasis away from bureaucracy on the standards and assessment of quality enhancement of learning and teaching in higher education, could mean a further change to institutional internal quality procedures and systems. This is highlighted in the Better Regulation Task Force, Higher Education: Easing the Burden Report (July where it is suggested that a shift towards more integrated, co-ordinated and less onerous approaches to quality assurance and enhancement are developed. Fundamental changes in the shape of further and higher education and the way of working, resulting from technological change and the development of the information/ learning society means continual change and development must be embraced. An even greater recognition of the importance of life-long learning is also emerging as the pace of global change increases. The shift towards educational progression linked to a process of continuous personal and professional development, indicates that a much more integrated approach to education is needed. Institutions also have a contributory role in the development of policy relating to the Leadership, Management and Governance agenda set by HEFCE. Whilst the specifics may change, there have been three key common themes which have been constant throughout: The need to achieve sustainable excellence in all areas, with less resource, to an ever more demanding customer base. The need to develop better leadership and management practices across all aspects of what HE and FE deliver. The need to enhance management capacity and capability. 2 The growing use of the Excellence Model in the Public Sector A survey undertaken by Price Waterhouse Cooper in August 2000 on behalf of the Cabinet Office, analysed 3,500 different public sector organisations, and is the largest study of this nature conducted in the sector. Their findings showed that there has been an explosion in the use of the Excellence Model in the public sector. An estimated 44% of organisations were using the Model with more than two thirds having started since 1999, when the Public Sector Model was published. It is estimated that the pace of growth is continuing to increase. Although many of these organisations are at an early stage of implementation, 81% of users found that the Model has already proved to be an effective tool within their organisation. Almost all agreed that the long term use of the model would help them to achieve continuous improvement and consequently improve front line service to customers. 85% also stated that the Model helped them to link together key policies and initiatives. More recent figures 4

7 Background and context suggest that the usage across the UK public sector has exceeded 60% with many organisations adopting it organisation-wide e.g. the Crown Prosecution Service, The Probation Service and the Ministry of Work and Pensions. According to the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) (2001), the Excellence Model is used by over 20,000 organisations (of these at least 10,000 are SME s) across Europe, by 60% of Europe s largest companies, and by 9 of the 13 European companies in the FT s 50 World s Most Respected Companies. In the UK it has been reported that even in 1996, 35% of companies were found to be using or intended to use the EFQM Excellence Model as a guide to self-assessment. The EFQM has also established a Public Sector Steering Group, which is seeking to address the particular needs of the public sector, raise awareness and promote the use of the Model. A specifically identified area within this group is that of Education. The Education Community of Practice chaired by Mike Pupius aims to bring together educational institutes from across Europe, to share best practice and ideas about the practical use of the Model. (Further information and papers from previous meetings are available on the website at 3 The benefits of introducing the Excellence Model It has been recognised that the Model provides a number of key benefits which have been proven to be of value: It looks at all areas of the organisation offering a holistic approach, which has been absent from many other management approaches that have been used previously. It provides a process of self-assessment against a nonprescriptive but detailed set of criteria yet is flexible as to when or how this is undertaken. The approach can be adapted to suit the requirements of the user, the size of organisational unit and the extent to which resources can be committed. The assessment process is based on factual evidence but the process can be defined at a time and pace to suit the individual organisation. A self-assessment can be completed in as little as a day or with extensive evidence being collected which can take several weeks. It offers a means by which other initiatives such as IiP and Balanced Scorecard can be held and knitted together in an integrated way. It offers a way in which a common focus can provide a new way of working that could be embedded into the organisation. It provides a balanced set of results indicators, not just financial, that focus on the need of the customer, the people in the organisation, the local community and other elements of society, the regulatory bodies and the funding providers. As the Model is used widely across Europe, and has been extensively tested in a range of sectors - private, public and voluntary - it offers benchmarking opportunities with others within and outside the sector, providing a common language to share good practice and develop both individual and organisational learning. It provides a framework through which the kernel of the organisation s issues could be surfaced, investigated and improved continually. The Model also engages organisations in an analysis of stakeholders, and particularly supports the recognition of the needs and expectations of customers and customer groups. The EFQM defines customers as final arbiter of the product and service quality, and customer loyalty. It suggests retention and market share gain are best optimised through a clear focus on customer needs. In other words it encourages institutions to have a clear focus on the student experience. The Model therefore offers a strong stakeholder-focused approach which is at the heart of everything that HE and FE institutions strive for. Most, if not all, institutions aim to put students at the heart of learning and teaching whilst considering other key stakeholders, such as parents, employers, partners, funding providers and regional/local communities. The student relationship often goes far beyond what might traditionally be viewed as a customer relationship, with students in some institutions seen as partners in the learning process. This means that unless institutions are driven by a way of working that looks inside at what is being done and how it is being done for all key stakeholders, then it is unlikely that continual improvement which meets or exceeds stakeholder s expectations, could be achieved and sustained. This ethos of excellence that the Model provides also builds on, and relates to, the positioning of educational institutions alongside the needs of the local and wider society, as defined nationally by the Dearing Report and globally by the World Declaration on Higher Education: It is against this background that Sheffield Hallam University and the University of Durham joined together to explore the potential of applying this approach within higher education. This idea was then developed further and in 1999 was granted funding for formal researching and testing to take place through HEFCE s Good Management Practice initiative with additional funding provided by DEL. From this, the GMP143 Programme was formed (see Appendix for further details of the Programme and Good Management Practice Initiative) involving a consortium that also included Cranfield, Salford and Ulster Universities and Dearne Valley FE College. 5

8 Introducing Excellence 1 Introduction One of the initial barriers to introducing these concepts was the variety of definitions that surrounded the term excellence, and the relationship that excellence has with quality, particularly in an academic environment. The need for clarification, a shared understanding and an appreciation of where excellence needs to be positioned within the current context, has been critical. Excellence needs to be defined as a way of working. The shift from quality to excellence is subtle but significant. In most cases it has been determined that the term excellence embraces quality, but looks beyond this to an outcome that is excellent in the eyes of all relevant stakeholders. The need to embed excellence requires a mind-set change that this programme has identified as challenging for the sector to embrace. 2 Putting quality into context As with many other parts of the Education sector, the further and higher education sectors are subject to a proliferation of mandatory, statutory or other quality reviews. Examples in higher education include Institutional Audits, Investors in People and Charter Mark, to name just a few. Some parts of higher education are also taking notice of other public sector standards, such as Best Value for cleaning and catering services. In further education examples are similar, looking at College wide and subject, or department specific provision. In 1998, the British Quality Foundation reported that a survey had revealed the following: Survey Statement Non-University Higher Education Institutions Post-1990 Universities Pre-1990 Universities Have an academic quality statement 100% 95% 77% Have a quality statement relating to non-academic areas 86% 74% 46% Have a quality improvement system for academic affairs (not recorded) 90% Have a quality improvement system for non-academic affairs 71% 84% 38% These results suggest that the concept of Total Quality Management (TQM) and its application has been broadly accepted in the post universities and the Non-University higher education institutions, but that regardless of the background of the institution, the response tends to be at an academic rather than holistic organisation-wide level. The emphasis with quality systems has therefore been primarily on the assurance of quality in specific (and mainly academic) areas, rather than the holistic approach offered by the Excellence Model. This has been at the behest of the Quality Assurance Agency that has set out a framework for quality assurance rather than quality or total quality management. The fact that the term quality has connotations of both standards and excellence has been a difficult concept for the sector to grasp particularly as quality has traditionally been measured through standards frameworks set by others. The concept of quality being related to meeting student expectations represents a major shift in thinking for the sector. 6

9 Introducing Excellence 3 The evolution of Excellence The European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) was created in 1988 by 14 leading European businesses. They had been inspired by the philosophies of Total Quality Management which had transformed parts of the manufacturing sector, and had started to transfer to other sectors across the world. They also drew from the experience and knowledge base in America, where the National Malcolm Baldrige Award had been launched to find exemplar US organisations. The EFQM is a not-for-profit organisation who originally developed the EFQM Excellence Model as an assessment framework for the European Quality Award (which was launched in 1991) and designed to analyse any organisation against a set of excellent criteria. Marked out of 1,000 points, award winning organisations achieving 600 or more points are deemed to be exemplars in their field. It was then realised that the Model was being used more widely across the public sector, and also within business units of larger organisations, and by small organisations. This led in 1995 and 1996 to the launch of the Public Sector Award, the SME Award and the Award for Operational Units. There have been relatively few public or education sector award winners. Notable exceptions include: Organisational Excellence Business Excellence EFQM Model Baldrige Model Business process management Juran, Crosby, Peters System thinking, psychology Deming's 14 points, the customer Focus on process variability Quality inspection - statistical process control Scientific management - Taylorism Figure 1 The Evolution of the Excellence Concept Dell Primary School. UK Quality Award, 1997 Foxdenton School and Integrated Nursery. UK Quality Award Winner 1999 and European Quality Prize Winner 2000 Faculty of Engineering, Marmara University, Turkey. Finalist in 2000 European Quality Award Inland Revenue, Cumbernauld. European Quality Award, 2000 St Mary s College, Londonderry. European Quality Award 2001 Runshaw FE College. UK Quality Award, 2002 Throughout the 1990 s the use of the Model spread across the UK and across a wider sector base than had originally been predicted. Many organisations used the Model specifically as an analysis tool, and were not interested in the Award process. In response to the growing use across the public sector and the issues raised about language and jargon, a Public and Voluntary Sector version of the Model was launched in It is this Model that has been used and applied to the further and higher education sectors. Now in 2003, the Model has been refreshed and updated and is continuing to be used as a framework for continuous improvement. During the initial researching of the Excellence Model, it was found that there were eight fundamental concepts of excellence that were standard across all sectors, all sizes and all types of organisation. The experience of introducing the EFQM Excellence Model into further and higher education suggests that a full understanding of these concepts is needed if the wider aspects of excellence are to be embraced. 7

10 Introducing Excellence 4 Defining and understanding Excellence and its concepts In the most recent 2003 version of the Model, Excellence is defined as: Outstanding practice in managing the organisation and achieving results based on a set of Fundamental Concepts These fundamental concepts are: Orientation Customer Focus Leadership and Constancy of Purpose Management by Processes and Facts People Development and Involvement Partnership Development Corporate Social Responsibility Continuous Learning, Innovation and Improvement These fundamental concepts are further defined to give breadth and depth of understanding. As part of the programme, they have been used and applied widely in both further and higher education contexts and have been interpreted to these contexts as shown in Table 1. Learning points When introducing excellence principles within an institution, the lessons learnt have been that it is important to share and understand these concepts fully. Putting the emphasis on the fundamental concepts in a positive way, which is not interpreted as challenging any of the existing values that may already be apparent in the institution, can be a helpful introduction to the Model. To move straight into an explanation of the Excellence Model itself can create confusion and can lead to issues around the language of the Model. On a practical level, it has also led to an academic analysis of the Model itself, its validity and evidence base, providing a digression which hinders consideration of the principles on which it is based. It has also been important for the concepts to be explored and interpreted by individuals and then contextualised in individual terms, in the context of their own systems, processes and understanding of their individual and collective situation. Exploration of the concepts of Excellence has also helped to understand what Excellence means in a practical way. Where explanation using only the Model has taken place, expectations about the level and type of improvement that could be undertaken have been raised, and in some cases not met. The Fundamental Concepts of Excellence EFQM Excellence Model Definitions (2003) Excellence is achieving results that delight all the organisation s stakeholders. Excellence is creating sustainable customer value. Excellence is visionary and inspirational leadership, coupled with constancy of purpose. Orientation Customer Focus Leadership and Constancy of Purpose Interpretation for Further and Higher Education Focusing clearly on and understanding students and other customers, their needs, expectations and values, keeping in consideration and valuing their contribution, and the contribution of other stakeholder groups. Anticipating, balancing and meeting the current and future needs of students, staff and others, through developing and setting a balanced range of appropriate indicators or targets, tracking performance, benchmarking, and taking appropriate action based on this holistic range of information. Clearly demonstrating visionary and inspirational leadership, which is transparent and open, with a constancy and unity of purpose which is shared by everyone in the institution. 8

11 Introducing Excellence EFQM Excellence Model Definitions (2003) Excellence is managing the organisation through a set of interdependent and interrelated systems, processes and facts. Excellence is maximising the contribution of employees through their development and involvement. Excellence is developing and maintaining value-adding partnerships. Excellence is exceeding the minimum regulatory framework in which the organisation operates and to strive to understand and respond to the expectations of their stakeholders in society. Excellence is challenging the status quo and effecting change by using learning to create innovation and improvement opportunities. Table 1 The Fundamental Concepts of Excellence Management by Processes and Facts People Development and Involvement Partnership Development Corporate Social Responsibility Continuous Learning, Innovation and Improvement Agility Future Focus Interpretation for Further and Higher Education Understanding and systematically managing all activities through a set of interdependent and interrelated systems and processes, with decisions based on sound and reliably evidenced information. Developing, involving and engaging staff, maximising their contribution in a positive and encouraged way, with shared values and a culture of trust, openness and empowerment. Developing meaningful and mutually beneficial relationships, both internally and externally, in order to gain added value for partners, and support the achievement of both strategic and operational objectives. Understanding, appreciating and considering positively the way in which the institution interacts with and impacts on the local and wider society, from both a practical and ethical perspective. Stimulating, encouraging, managing, sharing and acting on learning and experiences, making changes using innovation and creativity, and enabling continuous improvement to add value in a consistent way. The ability to act quickly to the changing demands of students and stakeholders in terms of speed of response and flexibility to deliver. Understanding the short- and longer-term factors that affect the organisation and the education market and planning to take account of these. 9

12 Introducing Excellence From benchmarking, it has been identified that the US Malcolm Baldrige Award ( has two further fundamental concepts or values: agility and future focus. Agility is defined as the ability to react quickly to the changing demands of students and stakeholders. The US experience is of organisations that are learning have an explicit focus on, and measurement of, response times to help drive the simplification of the organisational structure and work processes. All aspects of time performance are becoming increasingly important and should be among key process measures. An example would be the response time to a student application or the time taken for a student to enroll. Future Focus in today s education environment is about understanding the short and longer term factors that affect the organisation and the education market. The US Model suggests that the pursuit of organisational excellence requires a strong future orientation and a willingness to make long-term commitments to key stakeholders - the community, employers, faculty, and staff. The institutions planning must anticipate many factors, such as changes in educational requirements, instructional approaches, resource availability, student/stakeholder expectations, new partnering opportunities, technological developments, the evolving internet environment, new student and market segments, demographics, community/societal expectations, and strategic changes by comparable organisations. Strategic objectives and resource allocations need to accommodate these influences. In developing a HE version of the Excellence Model it is felt that there is merit in including these two additional concepts or values. Learning point The fundamental concepts of excellence, as defined by the EFQM, are wide ranging, but it has been found that they can be usefully supplemented with learning from the US Model. The introduction of the concepts of future orientation and long-term commitment in the UK higher education sector have been beneficial, with the additional area of transparency also seen as a key concept for inclusion. 5 Introducing the EFQM Excellence Model The EFQM Excellence Model Public and Voluntary Sector version is available for purchase from the EFQM ( or from the British Quality Foundation ( An interpretation of the model in the context of Higher Education, with practical examples from a HE environment, has been produced by Sheffield Hallam University and is available from the Centre for Integral Excellence ( This section briefly introduces and gives an overview of the Model. The EFQM Model recognises that stakeholder needs are met through the process that describes the working of the organisation, hence process improvement is at the heart of any organisational development and it is through processes that the talents of people can be released, which in turn produces better performance. It also follows that improvement in the performance can be achieved only by involving the people in the continuous improvement of the processes they work in. It recognises that senior managers are too detached from these processes to effect long run sustainable improvement. They simply do not have the requisite variety. This simple model is shown in Figure 2. People Processes Performance Figure 2 The simple model for improved performance Learning point The need to identify, understand and anticipate the current and future needs of stakeholders is a critical starting point to both understanding, using and introducing the Excellence Model. It is on this foundation that all else is built. This clear focus at the start of any co-ordinated planning and review process will help to ensure that future direction is clearly based on a set of results as determined by external stakeholder requirements (such as student experience), rather than internal drivers for change. 10

13 Introducing Excellence Leadership Enablers People Policy & Strategy Partnerships & Resources Processes Figure 3 The EFQM Excellence Model People Customer Society Innovation and Learning Key Performance The EFQM Excellence Model itself (which is a registered trademark) was revised in 1999, and updated slightly in 2003, to take account of current thinking, practices and working environments. It is described by the EFQM as: A practical tool to help organisations establish an appropriate management system by measuring where they are on the path to Excellence, helping them to understand the gaps, and then stimulating solutions. Criteria 1 Leadership 1a 1b 1c 1d Areas to address 1e Criterion parts The Model, shown in Figure 3, is a non-prescriptive framework based on nine criteria, with five enablers and four results. The enabling criteria cover what the organisation does, and the results criteria cover what the organisation achieves. Enablers cause. The criteria and criterion-parts are the only key components of the Model framework parts to the model, with four or five criterion parts within the enablers, and two criterion parts within the results, although use of the Model does not require focus on all criterion parts. 9 Key Performance Areas to address Figure 4 The EFQM Excellence Model Criteria and Criterion Parts 1 2 Performance Indicators Enablers Leading indicators 6b 7b 8b 9b 9a 9b Time Lag 6a 7a 8a 9a Criterion parts Lagging indicators Stakeholder Perception Performance Outcomes The bullet points given within each criterion, part list possible areas to address. They are prefixed by may include to indicate that these are areas which give guidance and promote further thought, and are not intended to be mandatory or exhaustive. There are a number of dynamics within the Model which are significant. The time lag between the enablers and the results reinforces the connection that whatever action is taken, will ultimately impact of the performance and results of the organisation. The difference between the performance indicators and perception measures also show the need for a balanced set of performance measurements to ensure that early warning performance indicators are being tracked and measured, which could indicate longer term issues with perception, enabling action to be taken. The relationship between different criteria of the Model is also strong, with key themes emerging (such as communication) which are influenced and analysed in different criteria in different ways. The lines within the Model are therefore significant in demonstrating that everything is connected to everything else. Figure 5 The EFQM Excellence Model Dynamics 11

14 Introducing Excellence 6 The RADAR Concept The EFQM Guidelines introduce the so-called RADAR logic which consists of the following elements: Approach Deployment Assessment and Review Thus in performance management terms, the organisation is invited to say by which it wishes to measure its achievement. These results cover all aspects of performance, both financially and operationally, and the perceptions of its key stakeholders and will be driven by its overall strategic direction and the goals it wishes to achieve. The Excellence Model presents an integrated approach to performance management in that it provides the basis to assess how well it does the things that it does, for example in terms of how well the deployment of strategies are contributing to results being achieved. All these things that an organisation does are called approaches and key questions that are asked include: How effective and efficient are the approaches in delivering the required performance? Are the approaches deployed to their maximum extent? Is deployment carried out in a systematic and structured way? Is the effectiveness of approaches assessed and reviewed in a systematic way? Is there evidence of learning through the sharing of good practice and benchmarking? Does measurement and learning lead to the identification and prioritisation of specific improvements? The performance of the organisation is also assessed in terms of the results that are achieved and key questions that are asked include: Assess & Review Determine the required Plan & develop Approaches Do the results comprehensively measure what is important to customers and other key stakeholders? Do the results demonstrate positive trends against target? Do the results show good comparisons against external organisations that can be called best in class? Is there evidence that the results are caused by approaches? Within the Excellence Model, the results that are considered for the Customer, People and Society criteria fall into two categories: Figure 6 RADAR Logic Deploy approaches Perception Measures e.g. student satisfaction, staff satisfaction and society impact derived from surveys. Typically these are called lagging indicators. Performance Indicators e.g. student retention, student complaints, staff training outcomes, staff turnover, staff sick absence. Typically these are leading indicators. In the Key Performance criterion, results also fall into two categories: Performance Outcomes e.g. financial performance, research income, market share, audit results. Performance Indicators e.g. process performance (outputs, cycle times, defect or error rates, productivity, time to market, innovations), supplier performance, return on assets, building utilisation, utility consumption, royalties, patents, sharing and use of knowledge. RADAR was originally designed as the scoring matrix for the Excellence Model, with percentages assigned in each of the four areas. It is now used more widely, not just for scoring but also as a way of evaluating, validating and enhancing the information 12

15 Introducing Excellence and evidence presented in a range of areas. It encourages the rigorous analysis of information in terms of whether: Trends, targets, comparisons, causes, and scope for all results have been established. Approaches (things that happen usually strategic rather than operational) have been identified which are sound and well integrated. Each of the approaches has been deployed systematically and implemented into the system of the organisation becoming embedded as a way of working in all relevant areas. Assessment and review of each approach is undertaken with a framework for robust measurement, learning and improvement in place, which demonstrates continuous improvement. In practice RADAR can be used in a range of ways, such as: To ask questions when: developing business plans building evidence for external/internal audits writing bid documents considering proposals for new courses etc. To evaluate experiences such as: student and staff experiences in particular areas personal experience/feedback team feedback To derive a score following a self-assessment, providing: critical evaluation of evidence a benchmark score. Learning points Putting it into practice The Excellence Model and the concepts have been introduced in institutions to a broad range of staff, at both senior and departmental/unit based levels. This has been mainly through presentations and workshops, individual and group discussions, provision of training (usually Assessor or Ambassador for Excellence Training) and through the practical engagement of staff in self-assessment activities. It has been evidenced that knowledge, understanding and personal interpretation of the fundamental concepts is a significant part of the learning process when the Model is first introduced. 7 The Excellence Model and other management models and tools Work was undertaken during the programme to compare and contrast the Excellence Model with other management models and tools. This has shown that the Excellence Model is complementary to tools such as IiP and Charter Mark and also the industry standard, ISO, which had been deployed by Dearne Valley College. There are examples from the pilots that these tools can be seen as approaches that are embedded within an overall framework for Excellence. The table below shows how these tools map on to the nine criteria of the Model. It is interesting to note that the Academic Registry in one of the institutions made the decision not to be re-assessed against IiP in favour of having a broader approach to managing people derived from the learning from the Excellence Model. Early learning suggests that it is important to position the Model and its messages carefully so that it is recognised as an enrichment and enhancement tool. There is a danger that the Excellence Model itself, through self-assessment, could be viewed as a driver for change, which is used only once as part of an initial diagnostic exercise. It is important that the Model is viewed as a framework which supports an on-going journey towards excellence, which could start with a diagnostic, move towards integration through planning, and then become embedded as a strategic tool. It is important that it is clearly understood that the fundamental concepts are a way of working which the Model embraces, develops and explains in further detail. Excellence Model Enablers Leadership Policy and Strategy People Partnerships & Resources Processes Customer Satisfaction People Satisfaction Impact on Society Key Performance BSN EN ISO 9000: 2000 Investors in People Charter Mark BSN ISO Critical = Secondary = Indirect = Not addressed = Excellence Links Poster copyright British Quality Foundation 2001 Figure 7 Comparison of the Excellence Model and other management models and tools 13

16 Introducing Excellence The learning from this comparative study and from the work of the Consortium has been as follows: The Balanced Scorecard is in widespread use across both the private and public sectors in Europe The EFQM Excellence Model includes the essential elements of the Balanced Scorecard philosophy and its application. In particular the criteria are in themselves a form of balanced scorecard. The Enabler criteria include the elements of strategic application of the Balanced Scorecard. Organisations progress in terms of maturity to use the Balanced Scorecard as an approach within the overall application of the EFQM Excellence Model. This can provide a powerful focus for strategic management and the development of an integrated performance measurement and management framework. There is therefore significant potential for the use of the Balanced Scorecard within the application of the EFQM Excellence Model as a tool to enhance Integrated Performance Management. Frameworks of measurements or key performance indicators are in a relatively early stage of development in the HE sector. This is in major part due to a lack of understanding of stakeholder needs particularly regarding student experience. Most universities now carry out some form of student experience or satisfaction survey but fewer carry out staff experience surveys. Even fewer make any attempt to measure the perception of the wider communities they serve. There is significant potential to develop the business process perspective. Benchmarking is a tried and tested process that can significantly enable organisational learning and enhance organisational performance. There are numerous approaches to benchmarking and the commonsense approach draws appropriately from a mix of these. Benchmarking is not simply about performance measures. At its most effective it becomes a core business strategy. The EFQM Excellence Model provides a very effective route into benchmarking. It encourages benchmarking against measures of performance but also stimulates the search for good practice. Benchmarking can provide a valuable tool for individual and team development. For successful implementation, senior management commitment is a prerequisite. Leadership and communications effectiveness is an issue for most organisations, not just in HE. A predominant leadership style that adversely impacts on leadership effectveness is related to heirarchical thinking and command and control. A process orientation is required in the organisation to ensure benchmarking is effective. 8 The Excellence Model as a benchmarking tool A range of benchmarking activities were undertaken as part of the programme in the UK and internationally to learn how other institutions were applying the concepts of excellence. The results of these studies are summarised in a separate report (Benchmarking Methods and Experiences see but findings are similar to the results emerging from this programme. For example in a network of Flemish speaking universities in Belgium and The Netherlands, an adaptation of the Dutch version of the Excellence Model was being used for self-assessment at faculty and department level. In the US, the Higher Learning Commission is responsible for accrediting Institutions in around 50% of states. It is beginning to use the Baldrige Model to provide a framework for accreditation that is focused on a process view of an institution. Key themes emerging for improvement were leadership, process management and measurement. In particular it was found that: 14

17 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change 1 Introduction A significant element of learning stems from the realisation that the Excellence Model is just the beginning of the journey towards excellence. It is in itself a catalyst through which improvements can be identified and action taken. As a Model it provides a framework for co-ordinated analysis and thinking, rather than the solution to the issues it raises. This framework can be accessed and used in many different ways, as it is the significance of what it leads to that is important. Use of the Excellence Model is therefore not desirable or effective in an environment where commitment to addressing the issues that emerge is not achieved. 2 Accessing the EFQM Excellence Model and unlocking its potential Using the Excellence Model is not mandatory and the methodology not prescriptive, so it is important to access the principles within the Model in a way in which the institution is ready and able to do. Through our work we have found that there are many ways to access the learning that the Model unlocks it is important to focus on the learning rather than the Model itself. Learning point There are many ways to access the Model. Each are valid entry points through which improvements can be made and learning achieved, although our experiences suggest that whichever route is used, a full assessment is always the most desirable and should be undertaken at some point during the Excellence journey. This is to ensure that it is recognised that when issues are raised in one criterion they can be symptoms of issues which are being caused within one or more other criterion areas. This can seem a daunting prospect, but is often the most rewarding. Focus on one criterion e.g. leadership Focus on a theme e.g. process management Enablers People People Leadership Policy & Strategy Processes Customer Key Performance Focus on results to measure e.g. KPIs Partnerships & Resources Society Innovation and Learning Self-assess against the whole Model Focus on fundamental concepts Figure 8 Accessing The EFQM Excellence Model - Breaking the Model down 15

18 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change It has also been possible to apply the learning of the Model at different levels and parts of the institutions, with differing effects. The key to driving forward improvement activity, at whichever entry point is chosen, is to have senior management commitment in that area. Introducing the Model at senior management level has raised awareness and understanding of the principles of this approach to organisational rather than academic management, the alignment with other more academically focused quality systems, and relevance with the current priorities facing the sector. Once this understanding has been developed, it is helpful for members of the senior management team to be trained as key champions who understand and can share meaningfully the principles and application of these excellence concepts. Schools and Faculties Administrative departments Enablers People People Leadership Policy & Strategy Processes Customer Key Performance Research Institutes Partnerships & Resources Society Innovation and Learning Whole Institution Colleges Figure 9 Accessing The EFQM Excellence Model - Breaking the Institution Down Learning points It is possible (and can be highly effective) to work at a unitbased level initially, growing and developing the learning. At the same time it can be helpful to develop senior management commitment and enthusiasm, therefore building a top-down and bottom-up effect. Each in isolation can work, but tend to have more associated negative effects, but when this approach is used synergistically it can work well. The Model works well within any area at any level of an institution, yet works at its optimum when introduced at a strategic level across a whole institution. Evidence has been clearly demonstrated that where the Model has been introduced at local levels without senior management support, improvements that can be made are more limited and staff expectations have been raised artificially. Putting it into practice The Model has been a catalyst for major strategic re-orientation which now recognises that all aspects of the student experience are core to the University s purposes and not just academic teaching and research. The Model provides a way of integrating all the dimensions of obtaining feedback on the student experience. It has provided a gateway that we have needed for a long time. It is beginning to pull the University together without the destructive centralisation that is so de-motivating. 16

19 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change 3 Using self-assessment as part of a co-ordinated improvement process Where am I now? How to get there Where do I want to go? The majority of organisations using the Model use it as a way of finding out where they are now, considering where they want to improve, and then making decisions on how to get there. This can be simply illustrated as shown in Figure 10. Self-assessment allows an analysis against the Excellence Model which results in a number of outputs to be gained, as shown in Figure 11. Figure 10 Simple assessment concept Model Assessment Evidence In the initial stages, self-assessment can be used as a health check - a starting point for focusing attention and action, but once positioned correctly and integrated into the performance management system of an institution, it can become an integrated part of continuous improvement activities, as shown in Figure 12. Experience has demonstrated that self-assessment has provided a flexible way through which the management practices of a specified area can be reviewed. The availability of choice of the assessment process, and the flexibility of timing and resource needed, has also been helpful. Learning point Using self-assessment as a stand alone assessment or review tool does not lead to sustainable improvements unless it is integrated as part of a wider improvement cycle. The methodology used must be appropriate for the time, resource and needs of the situation, and must reflect the relevant stage reached on the journey to excellence. Strengths Areas for improvement Score Action plans Figure 11 Overview of inputs and outputs of self-assessment Excellence Self-Assessment Health check Business Plans & Self-Assessment Planning tool Integration & alignment Organisational Development Process Management Corporate Scorecard Goal Deployment Personal Development Customer and Supplier Relationship Management Partnership & Collaboration Learning Organisation Strategic tool Putting it into practice In one institution, a self-assessment process was initially tested outside the normal planning cycle and the consequent opportunities for a natural continuous improvement framework were lost. This led to a focus on the assessment process and method rather than the significance and use of the results. In one case this led to poor ownership of the results, with a fragmented approach to action. In another instance, so much attention had been paid to the assessment itself that many operational actions were surfaced, which then seemed daunting to action and did not necessarily address the underlying causes. In both these cases, the methodology was changed and the focus moved significantly towards self-assessment being an integral part of the business planning process, which is more strategically orientated. Figure 12 The Excellence Journey Maturity of organisation 17

20 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change 4 The link to planning sustainable integration Putting it into practice Positioning self-assessment as part of an integral planning approach is a key learning point from the research, and mirrors best practice from other sectors. This does not mean that all business plans have to be written and framed around the Excellence Model, but it does mean that using self-assessment as part of the planning process can lead to a greater clarity of focus and more resourceful and strategically focused plans. Identification of Stakeholders Self-assessment Action Planning Vision, mission values Implementation and review Identification of Stakeholders Strategic Planning Business Planning Leadership Maturity Continuous Improvement Strategic Integration Vision, mission values Identification of Stakeholders Integrated Planning Process Implementation and review Figure 13 Integration of the EFQM Excellence Model with Business Planning The VC commended the quality of the Faculty business plan and requested the Dean discuss with the Senior Management Group how the EFQM Excellence Model had supported the development of the plan. In one institution self-assessments are now being undertaken every 6 months by small review teams. This is leading to positive and negative results: Pro s: Con s: Learning: Engagement of the School and Faculty leaders in using the Model and collective gathering of information and trend data, sharing good practice, strengths and action planning for improvement activities is undertaken. Risk that the Model is only seen as a 6 monthly self-assessment and review which is bolted on to usual practice is not seen as changing management practice but perceived as additional work. Not enough time for identified actions and improvement activity to be acted upon. Commitment to change working practices is essential from everyone. It is not enough to be committed to the self-assessment and review process only, there needs to be commitment to making improvements and view this activity as an integrated activity which adds value. In another institution self-assessments are undertaken on an annual or bi-annual basis using a toolkit of self-assessment methods. These assessments are usually undertaken between September and January which allows the outcomes from the process to be directly linked into business plans, which are submitted annually in April. Actions emerging from the selfassessment activity are addressed strategically and operationally as appropriate, with individuals being assigned responsibility through the personal appraisal and objective setting process, which follows on from business planning. In this way the improvement activities become an integrated way of working, rather than a bolt on additional activity. 18

21 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change 5 The benefits of overcoming the challenges and barriers A range of strategic and operational benefits from across the Consortium have been recorded, demonstrating that the Excellence Model can, in many instances (although not all institutions) yield the following results. Key benefits of applying this approach The impact and influence of this continuous improvement approach has challenged the existing standards achieved. It has asked whether it can be bettered or improved in all areas of activity, with a high degree of detail. This has challenged what were previously felt to be areas of good practice and recognised that excellence is not a destination, but a journey. The significance of stakeholder analysis has been recognised, as well as having a clear identification of customers and partners, and the management of their interactions and relationships. This has had particular impact in relation to understanding the needs of students. It has helped to establish and prioritise key actions, at both strategic and operational levels. There has been an alignment of purposes, processes, activities and tasks (encouraging joined-up thinking) and an integration of efforts of different divisions for one common purpose. A consistent and coherent method of objectively assessing/reviewing the achievement of the institution s purpose has been provided, analysing effectiveness at every level of the institution. It has helped to ensure that the benefits to one division are not at the expense of those in another, when that would be detrimental to the common good of the whole institution. Communication across the institution has enabled sharing in a common language, with commitment gained as part of this process. It has put the emphasis on people as well as systems, processes and resources recognising that the culture of the organisation ultimately drives its success. There has been a requirement for institutions to recognise their societal role and define their purpose and values in relation to civil society rather than to market society. Business plans and their integration and focus have been improved. Strategic gaps in policies and strategies have been recognised and understood, with these sometimes being seen as the root cause of issues that have been surfaced and addressed in the past. A more coherent approach to cause and effect analysis is being recognised, with a greater recognition of how when we change the way we do things it impacts directly on our results. Internal communications strategies have been enhanced, with a clearer recognition of the need for openness and transparency. A range of further interventions, such as process management and leadership development have been introduced, with their significance and impact upon the institution understood and encouraged as a positive area for development. It has helped to bring together the proliferation of initiatives allowing them to work synergistically and supportively together, rather than potentially being viewed in isolation. Table 2 Key benefits of inplementing an excellence approach 19

22 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change However, there are a range of challenges and barriers which have been experienced during the research work. Many of these have been overcome, but some still remain. It is important to recognise that although all the institutions are different, many of the challenges and barriers that have been faced are common. The most critical barrier faced is that of the recognition for cultural change. In some areas (although not all) there has also appeared to be a lack of trust, or scepticism, for new ideas and challenges that have not been created or generated within, or specifically for, the sector. However, through discussions and engagement in improvement activities, staff spanning academic, administrative and technical areas have been able to recognise and appreciate the benefits. Being guided through the jargon that the Model brings and demonstrating the applicability in a HE and FE context has also been important. One of the key interventions that has proved beneficial in helping institutions overcome some of these issues, has been to have a member of staff at a senior management level who acts as a strategic driver for change a key champion. Using the Model in an appropriate and sensitive way is also important, with methodologies tailored to meet specific needs, and jargon kept to a minimum. Learning point Work with a champion who understands the Excellence Model, specific situations and needs, and who can interpret the language and the methodologies to suit the environment. One size does not fit all, so make sure the approach used is the right one for the context. This is not a quick-fix solution, so allow time to be taken to explore the options fully, and to judge success. Table 3 indicates some of the challenges that face the sector if it is to embrace an ethos of excellence in the future. The research has shown that without recognition of these issues, and a mindset change which will help put the building blocks in place to overcome them, the sector will not have the capability or capacity to respond to change in the future. Key Challenges and Barriers Fear of change and the unknown Hierarchy/boundary protection Insularity Highly trained experts need no further support perceived as a threat Acceptance and understanding of the Model and what it is really about Language and jargon Seen as not part of the day job Perceptions of what should be prioritised and how Already successful with current strategies and focus, so why use this approach? It s not broken so don t fix it Lack of trust Cynicism Fear of failing Conflict of what would like to do and what have strategic powers to do or control Academic questioning and critique of the Model Time required from staff, particularly those in senior positions often creates conflict with competing demands Sustaining the momentum, particularly where staff changes take place Fire-fighting rather than visioning Squeezing of resources Prioritisation of resource to quick-win or operational tasks Traditional baggage Arrogance Using self-assessment as an integrated tool rather than an add-on Fear that the Model will become a straitjacket used for control rather than as a means to restore trust Academic Freedom as a reason to resist change Lack of trust between academics and non academics or academics and central/admin functions Table 3 Key Barriers to embracing and implementing the concepts of excellence 20

23 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change Using the Excellence Model itself as an analysis tool, table 4 shows what the impact has been specifically in each area, and what this means for the sector. Criterion area Impact for the Consortium Potential for the Sector Leadership Some, but limited, impact at VC/PVC level, although greater awareness and acceptance at senior and middle management levels. Generally a better understanding of the need for a management driven as well as academically driven approach. Some management styles starting to change, particularly through better co-operative working and greater openness. Greater recognition that self-assessment can be a supportive tool for planning and the development of performance indicators. Development of appropriate leadership and management competency framework across the sector. Recognition of styles and behaviours that are acceptable. Development of feedback mechanisms (e.g. 360 feedback). Closer liaison with and listening to stakeholders in order to establish needs. Clearer focus on the internal needs of the organisation through an integrated management system, as well as the external needs by balancing stakeholder satisfaction. Policy and Strategy Recognition of the importance of a co-ordinated and integrated approach to business and academic planning, which includes stakeholder feedback. Recognition of the need for benchmarking, development of key performance indicators and the need for processes which are linked to policy and strategy. Need for better communication. Need for clearer direction setting. Clearer overall focus, direction and goals. Staff who all understand what their role is in achieving these goals. Policy and strategy that are based on the evidenced future needs and expectations of all stakeholders. Joined up thinking. Opportunity to use a holistic approach to academic and business planning. People Partnerships and Resources People starting to think differently. Strong commitment from staff to adopt this approach in some institutions. Demonstration of clear and supportive links with IiP. Internal communication is still a key area for improvement. Better empowerment of staff in some areas. Greater emphasis on partnership working. Some understanding starting to develop about the significance of knowledge management. Some recognition that financial processes need to be reviewed from a customer (staff/student/supplier) perspective. Can support a structured approach to addressing the cultural barriers within the sector. Will help to develop an environment where all contributions are treated equally, and everyone is valued. Improved staff and ultimately student experiences. Retention of staff and reduction of costs associated with recruitment, grievances etc. Better alignment of working practices. Increased co-operation and trust. Clearer management and better utilisation of assets which is understood by everyone. Better planning and management of information and communication technology pro-actively. Engagement and sharing of knowledge, helping our organisations of learning become Learning Organisations. Continued 21

24 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change Criterion area Impact for the Consortium Potential for the Sector Processes Customer People Society Key Performance Clear recognition and development work being undertaken in some areas on process mapping and process management. Many process improvement projects completed or being implemented. Realisation that need to be more strategic when identifying process improvements. Development and implementation of student experience surveys and other forms of student evaluation. Recognition for the need to set performance indicators that are not just based on academic attainment, achievement, or recruitment targets. Some evidence to show that there is an improvement in staff satisfaction although difficult to quantify at this time. Strong commitment and enthusiasm from staff who have been engaged in the work within each institution. Staff experience surveys introduced in some areas. Helping to develop a framework of indicators that will track and measure staff perception and performance. Society surveys have not been undertaken, but a greater awareness of Societal and Corporate Social Responsibility has been generated in some areas. Development of a balanced scorecard approach that includes a balanced set of key performance indicators, measures and targets. Clearer focus on the priorities of different financial and non-financial indicators. Realisation that a clearer set of indicators are needed and not necessarily just those supplied by HEFCE and other external bodies. Development of sophisticated and systematic process management infrastructures including the development of performance measures that are process-based. Development of courses and services for students, which are developed and delivered in a way that allows creativity and flexibility, but maintains a core of consistency, supporting a positive student experience. The need for better customer relationship management approaches, and a clearer definition of whom the customer actually is for each institution. Recognition of the student as a primary stakeholder (customer) of the organisation. Recognition that there are a range of customers (including internal customers) who need to be identified as part of the wider stakeholder group. Development of meaningful stakeholder data that is used in an appropriate and timely way as part of the wider planning process. Provides evidence base to bring about significant improvements in the student experience. Development of staff related indicators that monitor and measure staff perception and performance in a consistent way. Chance to find out what the organisation is achieving in relation to its people. Provides evidence base to bring about improvements in areas such as leadership, communication and process effectiveness. There is significant potential for institutions to consider the impact they have upon both their regional and the local community and understand their own Corporate Social Responsibility in greater detail. Their image will be one determinant of local student interest. Development of a balanced scorecard approach that includes a balanced set of key performance indicators, measures and targets. This can be inclusive of externally given targets, but also include other measures of performance that are felt to be important both in terms of outcomes and indicators. Development of process efficiency and effectiveness measures. Table 4 Key benefits evidenced when mapped against the Excellence Model 22

25 Applying the EFQM Excellence Model : A catalyst for change 6 Summary In summary, the Excellence Model provides a basis to define a way of working for an organisation, that enables the focus of continuous improvement to be balanced across all stakeholders and across what it achieves in performance terms and the approach to achievement. Since the Model derives from an extensive assessment of what constitutes good management practice it provides a self-reflective way to access what would be the priorities for improvement. The Consortium has demonstrated that the Excellence Model can be applied at institution level and in any type of operational area: school, faculty, college, administrative department and research institute. It only requires leadership and management commitment. Without this organisational learning is significantly diminished. Paradoxically it doesn t provide solutions to problems, only pointers to where it would be appropriate to search for good practice. It therefore attracts the criticism that this good practice, such as student surveys and process management, could be adopted without ever using or applying the Model to an organisation. Our research had shown however, that no other management model is capable of setting each management practice into an overarching framework and context, and capable of providing benchmark comparisons across all sectors throughout the UK and Europe. The Excellence Model is at its most powerful when it does become that way of working. It is of least benefit when senior management commitment and engagement is not given or when the holistic picture is not seen or accepted. 23

26 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential 1 Introduction The real success from using the Excellence Model comes when the potential within the Model has been unlocked. This means that the framework of criteria and criterion parts that the Model first presents needs to be understood in terms of the good management practice that is being highlighted. Using selfassessment as a stand-alone exercise to analyse where gaps in current practices lie, will not reap long term rewards. The development of an integrated process to continuous improvement, through which areas for improvement can be identified and acted upon strategically and operationally, is key. Once this understanding has been achieved, the need to adopt a wider base of management thinking needs to take place. The accessing of additional tools and techniques can also be helpful to support specific change or improvement activities. The Excellence Model provides the initial and holistic thinking platform through which targeted improvements can be identified. What the Model does not prescribe is how best to action these areas. This is where synergy with other management tools, techniques and practices has been found to work congruently with the Model. The Model identifies gaps in approaches. These are areas where activities are not being undertaken, such as a lack of customer feedback surveys. The Model itself does not explain how or which survey methodology to use, so other management tools and techniques are useful. This section explains in overview some of the key areas that the Model has unlocked in terms of improvement opportunities. It is possible to focus on any one of these in the first instance, but it is advisable to have been through a self-assessment which will look at which areas hold the highest priority in each situation, and what else needs to be considered. 2 Developing leadership and management capabilities and competencies A clear message that has emerged throughout the work has been the need for leadership recognition, understanding and commitment to the development of a holistic approach to excellence. Where strategic managers have been the driving force for change, then rapid and inter-connected improvements have been demonstrated. As with any major management initiative, VC and senior management leadership commitment, drive and ownership to adopting these principles at a corporate level is essential if the Excellence Model is to assist in making break-through improvement and having impact on the culture of an institution. It has been demonstrated that varied degrees of commitment have had a direct impact on the engagement, embedding and overall learning curve across the institutions. Where commitment has been high the pace of acceptance has been relatively high, the level of embedding as a way of working greatest and the best results demonstrated. Where commitment has been lower some incremental changes have been seen, but longer-term impact is likely to be less marked. This lesson has also transferred down the line within institutions, so the commitment of Deans/Directors etc. is critical for sustainable results to be achieved at school/department/faculty level. Where senior leaders have been personally engaged in improvement and learning activities using the Excellence Model, there has been a higher degree of commitment to being open to, accepting, and taking forward the outcomes. Where leaders have been less engaged, recommendations have not always been readily accepted and actions considered inappropriate or invalid. This demonstrates a need to develop the knowledge of senior leaders through engagement in the process, which requires their full commitment and prioritisation of time. This has also supported the idea that senior management across HE institutions do not need to develop a full and detailed understanding of the EFQM Excellence Model itself as a first priority. A further aspect of the learning is the role that 360 feedback can play in the development of leadership and management competencies and capabilities. This approach has been shown to provide a wider base of feedback upon which personal improvement in styles and behaviours can be made. This is also a critical aspect of open leadership where feedback at every leadership or management level should be listened to, understood and acted upon in a relevant way. The traditional individualistic nature of management styles, and the hierarchical requirement that has led to some command and control oriented styles of management need to be addressed, with more collaborative approaches adopted. In the 2003 version of the Model, the significance of the leadership role in driving continuous organisational improvement has been recognised with the introduction of a new criterion part to the Leadership criterion. This new addition highlights the best practice which suggests that leaders should identify and champion organisational change. This includes within it the need to understand internal and external drivers for change, ensuring change is delivered, management of stakeholders, supporting and enabling people to manage change, and measuring and reviewing the effectiveness of change, then sharing the knowledge gained. In many self-assessments against the Excellence Model and in staff surveys as well, communication has been identified as a major area for improvement. In one institution a senior academic remarked that for him he received communication on things he didn t want and found none listened to what he himself had to 24

27 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential say. Communication is most often seen as top-down and listening non-existent. This has as one of its root causes the hierarchical nature of most institutions with little cross-hierarchy process thinking. It is probably one of the most significant areas for improvement for the sector. Some institutions are beginning to tackle this through the development of a multi-faceted communication strategy, the appointment of communication specialists as directors and the introduction of process management. Learning point In the challenging and rapidly changing environment in which the HE and FE sectors operate, it is important that it is clearly understood by leaders at all levels that the EFQM Excellence Model is a model which assists change, rather than adds an additional burden to it, and that their commitment, understanding and engagement is critical if step-change improvements are to be made. Putting it into practice Leadership is now seen as the internal process needed to define the values, culture and purposes of the organisation and provide the motivation, drive, support and recognition necessary to attain them. Management is now seen as the internal process by which values, purposes, processes, activities and results are aligned and most effectively actualised. This is achieved by the optimal mix and balanced integration of support services, systems and processes, with teaching, research and sharing knowledge and the interactions of the people within the institution. Governance is now seen as the process by which leadership and management are held accountable to stakeholders and society as a whole and for ensuring that the inherent values of HE are not compromised by external pressures or internal dissonance. process-architecture and an organisation-wide strategy for process management. This approach can lead to the prioritisation of process improvement projects using managers who are trained in process management tools and techniques. Self-assessment has highlighted the unconnected nature of many activities within institutions demonstrating how work is often undertaken in isolation, rather than being linked through core or common processes, which would lead to a common way of working, joined up thinking and the elimination of low added value activities. Learning point The identification of key processes at institutional or unit based level is critical. Ownership of these processes needs to be managed at a senior level, with accountability and responsibility given for performance, management and improvement of the process. Traditionally HE and FE institutions, like many other public and private sector organisations are operated around a hierarchical structure. When considered in process terms, this structure does not necessarily re-enforce efficiency or effectiveness. There are often many cross-cutting processes (time-tabling, enrolment, induction, appraisal, finance, recruitment etc.) which can be either managed and/or delivered in a range of ways across the institution. Local practices emerge which duplicate effort and lead to a variance in either staff and/or student experiences. 3 The move towards a process orientation A significant area of development has been where a number of institutions have started to understand and appreciate the significance of processes and process working. This has led to a new way of thinking that has had dramatic impact, especially at strategic levels. From Heirarchy to Process Working Figure 14 The recognition of process definition, working and management Using the Excellence Model has identified that awareness of these concepts in terms of organisational learning is low, particularly across the HE sector, and that many of the fundamental building blocks are not always in place. The Model, however, suggests the need for a detailed review of processes and the development of a 25

28 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential Some improvements can be made at sub-process level (e.g. by looking at specific parts of processes, such as how course handbooks are produced). This can be effective in the short term and can lead to better levels of satisfaction and improved working practices for both staff and students. In the longer term, a detailed understanding and mapping of the institutional processes needs to be achieved. In this way, sub-processes can be aligned and positioned more accurately and their worth identified in context. Adopting a cross-institution approach can lead to much better good practice sharing and to the standardisation of certain processes where this is appropriate. Also, focused reviews of specific processes can lead to significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness. For example, in one institution a review of enrolment reduced queuing time from 3 hours to 30 minutes and improved student satisfaction significantly. Reviewing processes can also lead to a better alignment of staff with the process they work within, and a clearer definition of the skills and competencies that are required. This can help to focus staff training and development, as well as helping to develop a stronger competency framework against which staff can be recruited. Putting it into practice Staff have, to a greater or lesser degree, moved to a quality culture of continuous improvement/raising standards by shifting from compliance to process thinking Putting it into practice At another institution, university-wide processes have now been mapped, and the sub-processes have started to be defined. In some academic schools and central administrative departments processes at this level has also been mapped and understood in greater depth, with some areas re-organising in line with their identified core process areas. The introduction of a formal process management approach in one department has led to the following: There have been a range of benefits from adopting this approach, but three key benefits have been identified as follows: Efficiency and effectiveness savings can only really be achieved when tasks are analysed from a process perspective. Cost savings have been made and funds re-channelled through a detailed analysis of why activities are undertaken, when, by whom, how and for what purpose. Duplication and fragmentation have also been reduced and clarification of systems that have evolved over time, that no-one really understands or knows why they take place, has led to a streamlining and more effective processes. This has had a positive impact on both staff and students. Greater partnership and collaborative working. The realisation that cross-cutting processes can be improved through collaborative working, where everyone benefits, has enabled a much greater degree of cross-team improvement working than in previous years. There is a real recognition that problems are not someone else s fault but instead are issues which need to be resolved collectively. A greater focus on openness and consultation has been experienced within the institution, as the need for sharing information and working together only succeeds in a trusting and open environment. Process reviews must involve representatives of key stakeholder groups and from this pooled knowledge, greater ownership in process changes can be obtained. Putting it into practice It is beginning to help people think more in terms of processes and tasks rather than functions and jobs. 26

29 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential 4 The significance of partnerships and co-operation Applying the Excellence Model in schools, departments, faculties and colleges has highlighted that institutions are often unconnected and dysfunctional. This is in part due to the lack of clarity about cross-institutional processes, but also symptomatic of the lack of trust within institutions, particularly between central/administrative and academic functions. Through the process of self-assessment there has been a greater realisation that all parts of the institution need to work together more effectively, moving forward in a mutually supportive roll. This is particularly critical for specific parts of the student experience e.g. enrolment, induction, finance, timetabling, graduation etc. At the same time it is now being seen as a critical pre-requisite of the planning process if schools and administrative units do not work together to plan for future provision, then how will appropriate space be allocated/built, or equipment purchased in time, or catering be available for lecture timetables that have changed? Uneven Relationship Crisis of Purpose Complacent Coercive (Win/Lose) Hierarchical Thinking Initial Adversarial (Defensive) Negotiated Relationship Positional (old Policies) Crisis of Interdependence Joint Interests (Involvement) Co-operative Relationship Joint Continuous Improvement (Win/win) Crisis of Trust Process Thinking Figure 15 The Relationship Journey John Carlisle Partnership With such a strong link to process working, partnerships and co-operation have been highlighted as a key area for development in the sector. This will only occur if the culture of the sector adapts to recognise this particular aspect of partnering and embraces the philosophy of co-operation rather than internal competition. In other words key players attempt to achieve win/win solutions. There is already a great deal of success within the sector, particularly achievements through academic partnerships within or across subject areas. The need to expand this already well established pattern across administrative and academic boundaries is essential. The Relationship Journey described in Figure 15 illustrates these issues as a journey from hierarchical thinking to process thinking in which a change in culture needs to take place, a journey from combatative win/lose relationships to co-operative win/win. Evidence from process improvement work suggests this begins to happen when everyone begins to identify a common purpose or vision for the process, and when everyone s individual role is respected and recognised. Finally, encouraging and rewarding win/win solutions begins to build a climate of trust in the organisation. Learning points The Excellence Model can provide a vehicle for changing the mindset in a productive and pro-active way, but this has to be achieved and demonstrated at every level of the institution. Evidence has demonstrated in practice that staff are more proactive in their approach to tasks, focusing on the outcome rather than the problem, and look outside their traditional boundaries to achieve it. It has also been a way of starting to recognise the added value that people within institutions can bring. Partnering skills is a key competency which needs to be developed across the sector, particularly at leadership and management levels. 27

30 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential 5 Key Performance Indicators are we really measuring excellence? With a strong link to a process orientation, the development of a measurement framework is also seen as key. This framework, when linked to core processes, can enable institutions to evaluate performance across a range of indicators on a consistent basis. The need for indicators that measure both satisfaction and performance from staff and students is also essential. The challenge for the sector is to balance the needs of externally applied indicators against those that are meaningful and relevant to the institution. It is also important that the measurement framework sets indicators that need to be measured, rather than indicators that are easy to measure. Experience shows that combining the Balanced Scorecard approach with the Policy and Strategy, Processes and criteria of the Model provides a sound basis upon which to develop a Corporate Scorecard. From this, specific indicators (such as Student Satisfaction) are passed down to schools and departments where they form part of the local scorecard. Again, the critical link is to business planning and the need for a consistent and comprehensive planning framework. The myriad of performance indicators by which HE and FE sectors are assessed, arise from the requirements of external agencies, the Government and other stakeholders. This has meant that the amount of data collected by institutions is vast. What has emerged from the research is that this has lead to a disaggregated approach to performance measurement, monitoring and management. With best practice suggesting that there is a need to determine key indicators which will both anticipate and monitor performance, as well as indicators which measure perception across financial and non-financial areas, it could be assumed that the sector is measuring all it can. Evidence suggests, however, that the disaggregated nature of current measurement and monitoring processes within institutions, which have grown and evolved mainly in response to external requirement, do not necessarily mean that all types of indicators are covered. For example, staff and student satisfaction should be measured, alongside performance indicators such as recruitment and retention for students and absence and training for staff. This has been found not necessarily to be the case, although in some cases it has since been introduced. Financial "To succeed financially how should we appear to our funding providers?" Customer "To achieve our vision how should we appear to our students and customers?" Vision and Strategy Internal Business Process "To satisfy our stakeholders what business processes must we excel at?" The linking of strategic objectives and key performance measures is also a growing area of development. In many self-assessments undertaken, performance indicators are set based on internal or external pressures for information and evidenced data, rather than being linked directly through to set strategic objectives. Within this Model of excellence, a balanced set of key performance measures should be measuring the achievement of planned performance, i.e. strategic objectives, which are deployed through a series of key processes. The Balanced Scorecard also includes a process perspective. The challenge for both HE and FE sectors is to develop a balanced set of indicators (the critical few) which can be used to monitor and track achievement of internally planned objectives, and which meet external requirements. Using a Balanced Scorecard approach within this Excellence Model framework has helped to start to clarify measures as set at institutional and department/school based level. (See Linking the Excellence Model to other Management Models and Tools publication for more details about the Balanced Scorecard). 28 Innovation, Learning and Growth "To achieve our vision how will we sustain our ability to change and improve?" Figure 16 The Balanced Scorecard (after Kaplan and Norton) Using the Model as a self-reflective analysis tool has enabled a judgement of performance against a set of criteria which have been developed based on best practice from a range of organisations across the world. This reflection has not offered judgement or pointed to failings, but has identified areas which could be improved. In this respect it has been refreshing to analyse performance for internal improvement rather than external audit purposes.

31 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential Learning point Performance and perception measures need to be set, which can monitor and measure the likely and actual ability of the institution (either at whole organisation, or planning unit level) to achieve its set objectives. The link between strategic objectives set, processes which deliver them and performance indicators which measure performance should be apparent. Most recently, a self-assessment method based on a matrix method has been used and this enables a simple part perception, part evidence derivation of scores for each criteria to be determined. These assessments have confirmed earlier findings that the measurement areas for customers, people and society are very underdeveloped. Few of the institutions in the pilot group carried out systematic surveys of staff and students An example of score profiles from a selection of HE and FE institutions who have scored against the model, indicate that in most institutions there is a drop in scores in the results areas compared to the enablers. Criteria are scored out of 100%, which is then weighted according to the EFQM radar weightings. EFQM Assessment Benchmarking Graph 100 HE Benchmark 1 HE Benchmark 2 80 HE Benchmark 3 HE Benchmark 4 Score HE Benchmark 5 EQA Award Averages Public Sector Averages Leadership Policy & Strategy People Partnerships & Resources Processes Criterion Customer People Society Key Business Performance Figure 17 Benchmark score comparison trend data 6 Integrated performance management bringing together academic and administrative planning As suggested in the introduction, the assessment of quality already exists in many FE and HE institutions. The focus of these quality systems towards academic provision, however, suggests that a broadening or integration of these systems is desirable. Anecdotal evidence collected throughout suggests that business planning (in HE particularly) can be viewed at best as a useful way of generating an argument for a budget, and at worst business plans are produced, but a formal business planning process does not exist. This is a critical issue if the sector is to develop collaboratively in a coherent way. Although there is a requirement by HEFCE for the submission of a Strategic Plan from every HE institution, this does not necessarily indicate the presence of a robust or well integrated planning process. 29

32 Embedding Excellence Unlocking the Real Improvement Potential Learning point It is essential for all institutions to have in place a robust and integrated planning process, which determines both business and academic objectives at strategic and operational levels. This should be a process which cascades throughout and across the institution with strategic objectives at corporate level linked to strategic objectives at local level, operational objectives at team level and personal objectives at individual levels. Learning has also found that the integration and sustainability of excellence principles relies on such a planning process being in place. In order to move forward, the next stage of development will be to integrate, in an appropriate way through business planning, self-assessment against the Excellence Model, internal academic quality reviews, and stakeholder analysis and feedback (such as perception survey data). This will enable a continuous and holistic improvement review to be undertaken on an annual basis, from which strategic and operational planning priorities can be set. It has been recognised that this could potentially be a cycle where a robust assessment and plan is developed bi-annually, with an interim lighter-touch assessment and plan developed annually. The key to this process development is that the drivers are internal. Timescales and processes are determined within each institution, based on best practice elsewhere, but the focus is one of continuous institutional improvement. Although external audits will continue from the range of external agencies and bodies with an interest in HE and FE performance, it has been demonstrated in the Secondary sector that where continuous improvement is embedded as part of the business planning process, external audits become a routine and helpful external analysis, rather than a burdensome and bureaucratic activity, as some are viewed today. Putting it into practice Self-assessment has been an integral part of the institutes activity for several years, as part of the planning/assessment annual cycle and inspection process of FE. Staff within FE have been responding to this strategic requirement as directed by external funding bodies which has culminated in the current Learning and Skills Council CIF (Common Inspection Framework). The CIF is a self-assessment model that compares strongly to the EFQM Excellence Model and is subject to test through Ofsted and ALI. The quality enhancements that have emerged have included the value of a quality system that has a focus on improvement and raising standards rather than compliance. It is also acknowledged that there has been a positive impact/benefit of using EFQM in this way. The follow-on phase of the existing research work (GMP334) will take this work further and, working closely with QAA and a range of HE and FE institutions, plans to develop an integrated performance management system in this way. The challenge is to build a process which is responsive and reflects the needs of all stakeholders. The current demands on HE and FE for an increasing breadth and depth of data is in itself a critical area. The opening up of a wider range of potentially contentious issues which could result from such an integrated process also needs careful consideration in terms of planning and management. Strategic market analysis, external scanning and positioning Stakeholder management Academic review from internal and external sources (QAA,RAE) Academic management Self-assessment review of the management of the "business" Business management This integration potential is also supported by the work undertaken with FE, where self-assessment College wide, has been an integral part of the audit process placed upon FE by auditing bodies for many years. Students and staff Integrated planning process Meeting the needs of Funding and auditing bodies Other stakeholder groups Figure 18 The potential for an Integrated Performance Management approach 30

33 Integrating for Excellence: Managing Institutional Change 1 Introduction External customers Introducing the Excellence Model has, generally, been a successful intervention for supporting the development of institutional change. However, learning suggests that this is a key but not stand-alone intervention which can be used. A deeper understanding of the concepts of institutional evolution and change is needed in order to position the use of the Excellence Model and other interventions appropriately. It is significant that many organisations who have used, applied and integrated the Model have not necessarily sustained good performance. There are, obviously, many reasons why this may happen, but we believe that one of these reasons may relate to improvements only taking place within certain aspects of the organisation usually around the development of systems and processes, with other aspects of development ignored such as individual styles and behaviours. Embracing the wider concepts of institutional change is an area which will continue to be developed with the GMP334 programme (see Appendix), the findings from which will be disseminated in due course. 2 Developing institutional structure and culture When initially considering how an institution can evolve, there needs to be a recognition of the shift between control orientated and internally focused management to customer focused and externally focused management. With this change of approach, a new set of management interventions, skills and competencies are required. In particular one of the most powerful approaches is to introduce institution-wide student and staff experience surveys. The results if these can be used to target action to improve specific attributes. So for example in one institution, student feedback led to the opening of learning centres on a 24 hour, 7 day a week basis. The other source of feedback is from the measurement systems that can track process performance. Change Control oriented and internally focused Employee Feedback Figure 19 Institutional change focus Customer focused and supportive Customer Feedback Using the Excellence Model has started to unlock the potential for recognising aspects of an institution that have already made this transition, and those areas where further development may be required. It also helps to point towards prioritise that institutions have to make in the change process as not all improvements can be made at one time. A considerable element of learning is the connectedness that the Model provides, helping to demonstrate how different parts of an organisation inter-relate in a much more integrated way than may previously have been considered. For FE and HE institutions to grow and flourish in the demanding and globally competitive marketplace that they operate within, they need to be structured and managed in a co-ordinated way which embraces and develops flexibility, creativity and trust. In order to grow holistically, and in order to interact with other organisations in a meaningful and productive way, attention must be paid to both the structure, systems, culture and the individual people which make up each institution. To understand this more fully, it is helpful to consider institutions in the following way: Structures and Systems the external face of the institution Identifying, owning, managing and improving the processes of the institution are key to developing efficiency, effectiveness and flexibility. Building an institutional structure or design which recognises process working is also important. Developing policies and strategies which are shared and understood are needed to drive these core processes. Integrating a robust planning process at the heart of a continuous improvement cycle is needed to ensure that performance is tracked and monitored appropriately, and improvement actions are taken. Building performance measures set through this planning 31

34 Integrating for Excellence: Managing Institutional Change process, which reflect the objectives of the organisation and the processes through which they are delivered, need to establish trend data for both perception and performance measures. Managing and sharing knowledge creatively and openly in an environment that encourages continuous improvement and exchange of ideas, knowledge and information. Culture the internal feel of the institution Developing and sharing values across the institution is key if people within the institution are to work together effectively. Sharing and owning the vision, mission and ethics is an important part of growing together as an institution. Building strong and visionary leaders who lead and motivate others through their positive actions and encouraging styles. Developing compassionate management for individuals and teams which fosters trust, openness, honesty and the building of positive self and team worth. Growing capability, capacity and creativity through cooperation and partnership working within an outside the institution. Individuals the heart of the institution Assisting individuals to give and receive feedback from their peers and others compassionately, in order to continually improve and develop personally. Fostering a culture of continuous learning and personal development through the supporting of training and development to improve personal capabilities and performance, in line with institutional objectives and strategies. Enabling individuals to be recognised and rewarded for their contribution to the success of the whole institution. Encouraging all individuals to lead by example and to motivate others in a caring way. Developing individual styles and behaviours through selflearning and the development of personal values and beliefs which enable positive thinking and attitude. Embedding trust is a key individual driver and influencer. The development of a learning culture needs to therefore pay attention not just to the fabric of the institution, but also respond to the culture and individual drivers of those within the institution. The results of the research show that the Excellence Model provides a useful co-ordinating framework which allows institutions to recognise and take action in the area of structures and systems, but it also highlights the cultural issues and the individual styles and behaviours that are expected of an excellent organisation. 3 The toolkit approach, led by the EFQM Excellence Model What is now emerging is the understanding that the EFQM Excellence Model in itself looks, through self-assessment, at the external and internal aspects of institutions and starts to assess the structures and interventions in place which are dealing with the individuals within the institution. When used alongside and positioned congruently with Investors in People, the Excellence Model and IiP frameworks can help to support the planned development and improvement of the mechanical/systems aspects of the organisation, in co-ordination with the people/skills aspect of the institution. It also starts to unlock the issues of personal values and beliefs, particularly at leadership levels, and challenges whether they are aligned and integrated with the rest of the institution. It is in this area that advanced personal communications skills which support self-understanding and the informed development of behaviours and actions, can also support individual growth, which in themselves can support a broader cultural shift. When used in isolation and with self-assessment as a stand alone exercise, the Excellence Model could potentially become a mechanistic and systems focused tool. The outcomes from using it could be focused primarily on changing how the whole institution operates, without necessarily considering in enough depth how significant the values and beliefs of the individuals within the institution can be, and the potential impact that ignoring this aspect of the institution could have. It is critical, therefore to pay attention to all of the areas for improvement that the Excellence Model unlocks, and exploring the underlying significance of each aspect from all perspectives. It is significant that the simple version of the Excellence Model contains only three elements: People, Processes and Systems (as outlined in Section Two). It was developed on the premise that to survive, prosper and grow, an institution needs skilled people with a shared sense of purpose, values and individual but congruent beliefs, working in clearly understood, mapped and managed customer orientated processes, supported by integrated planning, management and delivery systems. Learning point All institutions must be analysed and supported in growth and development using interventions that compliment growth across aspects of the institutions make-up. If one or more aspect is neglected, then there is a higher risk that long term sustainability will not be achieved as the institution has not grown as a whole integrated unit. 32

35 Conclusions 1 Overall conclusions With global growth and development expanding at a rapid rate, and with pressures from the present government (and probably any future government) for the UK to continue to compete at this global level, further and higher education must continue to respond and adapt to the changing needs of individual learners, the government, employers and society in general. Fostering a commitment to learning throughout life is critical, with the current pursuit of excellence raising standards in teaching, learning and research paramount. But as this research has shown, those institutions who believe that their academic achievements to date mean that they can rest on their laurels, may find that complacency today leads to disaster tomorrow. With approximately 60% of UK HE institutions currently experiencing financial crisis (according to HEFCE figures), the integrated management and growth of HE institutions has never been so critical. Drawing from the research over the past three years working with pre- and post 1992 Universities and FE colleges, these are the main conclusions: Use of the EFQM Excellence Model, when positioned carefully within an institution as part of continuous and planned improvement processes, is wholly appropriate and useful within both HE and FE contexts, at various levels. However, it must be ensured that the Model is used at the right time for the right reasons its success is both climate and culture dependant. Full leadership commitment and support is required for breakthrough benefits to be realised. Some incremental changes can be made if the model is introduced at local level, but ultimately the whole institution needs to respond collectively to improvement activities and culture change issues. Self-assessment is a useful analysis tool and entry point through which improvements can be identified and prioritised. It should become an integral part of business planning and quality management activities rather than a stand alone analysis activity. The focus should be on strategic level improvements rather than operational level improvements as these will follow-on and fall out of strategic improvements. The Excellence Model is the catalyst for change, rather than the change agent itself. It can be used congruently with other management tools and techniques, even those that are specific to the HE and FE sectors. It works best when these differing interventions are well integrated and used within a continuous improvement agenda that focuses on each individual, the collective culture and the wider institutional framework. The Excellence Model, and the detail within it, does not necessarily need to be well understood by all staff from the beginning. What is important is that the principles and philosophy of excellence, as underpinned by the fundamental concepts, are shared understood and role modelled throughout the breadth and depth of the institution, particularly by those with leadership and management responsibilities. Introducing and developing a process management approach can be of significant benefit when applied strategically across a whole institution, and beneficial when applied at a more local level, leading to direct and in-direct cost savings in the longer term, and improved staff and student satisfaction rates in the short, medium and longer term. It is critical to pay attention to and action the individual beliefs, values and styles held by those working within an institution, especially at leadership levels. The development of leadership capabilities and competencies in the area of strategic business management as well as academic management is key. The development of a trusting and collaborative culture within institutions also has to be crafted and built from the shifting individual beliefs and ways of working which need to be inclusive rather than exclusive building on already well established best practices. Sector performance measures need to be radically reviewed for both individual and institutional performance. This applies to measures set internally within an institution, and those set externally by funding and auditing agencies. There needs to be much greater synergy between the measurement frameworks and the way of working to permit the growth of an excellence culture rather than a compliance culture to be developed. The breadth and depth of performance measures needs to be refined to ensure a balance is established which allows both perception and performance to be measured in a meaningful and consistent way, with realistic targets set and comparable trend data collected. Benchmarking needs to embrace all aspects of planning, management, delivery and measurement, rather than being focused on performance benchmarking. The sharing of good practice and the benchmarking of approaches to continuous improvement activities within and outside the sector is critical if the pace of change required of the sector is to be met. The integration of academic and business management philosophies, when managed sensitively, can bring benefits in both areas. Through integrated planning and management the academic integrity of our institutions and those within it can not only be preserved, but enhanced in a range of creative and productive ways. The application of these principles within our sectors is not a cost, but an investment in future survival. Although not guaranteed as the complete solution, a number of studies undertaken of prize winning organisations and those using Total Quality Management principles have demonstrated that their use of this management tool has been proven to enhance performance, productivity and financial stability when compared to similar organisations over the same period. 33

36 Conclusions 2 Synopsis of key learning points Understanding the EFQM Excellence Model When introducing excellence principles within an institution, the lessons learnt have been that it is important to share and understand these concepts fully. Putting the emphasis on the fundamental concepts in a positive way, which is not interpreted as challenging any of the existing values that may already be apparent in the institution, can be a helpful introduction to the Model. To move straight into an explanation of the Excellence Model itself can create confusion and can lead to issues around the language of the Model. On a practical level, it has also led to an academic analysis of the Model itself, its validity and evidence base, providing a digression which hinders consideration of the principles on which it is based. It has also been important for the concepts to be explored and interpreted by individuals and then contextualised in individual terms, in the context of their own systems, processes and understanding of their individual and collective situation. Exploration of the concepts of Excellence has also helped to understand what Excellence means in a practical way. Where explanation using only the Model has taken place, expectations about the level and type of improvement that could be undertaken have been raised, and in some cases not met. The fundamental concepts of excellence, as defined by the EFQM are wide ranging, but it has been found that they can be usefully supplemented with learning from the US Model. The introduction of the concepts of future orientation and long-term commitment in the UK higher education sector have been beneficial, with the additional area of transparency also seen as a key concept for inclusion. The need to identify, understand and anticipate the current and future needs of stakeholders is a critical starting point to both understanding, using and introducing the Excellence Model. It is on this foudation that all else is built. This clear focus at the start of any co-ordinated planning and review process will help to ensure that future direction is clearly based on a set of results as determined by external stakeholder requirements (such as student experience), rather than internal drivers for change. Early learning suggests that it is important to position the Model and its messages carefully so that it is recognised as an enrichment and enhancement tool. There is a danger that the Excellence Model itself, through self-assessment, could be viewed as a driver for change, which is used only once as part of an initial diagnostic exercise. It is important that the Model is viewed as a framework which supports an on-going journey towards excellence, which could start with a diagnostic, move towards integration through planning, and then become embedded as a strategic tool. It is important that it is clearly understood that the fundamental concepts are a way of working which the Model embraces, develops and explains in further detail. Accessing the EFQM Excellence Model and unlocking its potential There are many ways to access the Model. Each are valid entry points through which improvements can be made and learning achieved, although our experiences suggest that whichever route is used, a full assessment is always the most desirable and should be undertaken at some point during the Excellence journey. This is to ensure that it is recognised that when issues are raised in one criterion they can be symptoms of issues which are being caused within one or more other criterion areas. This can seem a daunting prospect, but is often the most rewarding. It is possible (and can be highly effective) to work at a unit-based level initially, growing and developing the learning. At the same time, it can be helpful to develop senior management commitment and enthusiasm, therefore building a top-down and bottom-up effect. Each in isolation can work, but tend to have more associated negative effects, but when this approach is used synergistically it can work well. The Model works well within any area at any level of an institution, yet works at its optimum when introduced at a strategic level across a whole institution. Evidence has been clearly demonstrated that where the Model has been introduced at local levels without senior management support, improvements that can be made are more limited and staff expectations have been raised artificially. 34

37 Conclusions Introducing and Using Self-Assessment Using self-assessment as a stand alone assessment or review tool does not lead to sustainable improvements unless it is integrated as part of a wider improvement cycle. The methodology used must be appropriate for the time, resource and needs of the situation, and must reflect the relevant stage reached on the journey to excellence. Overcoming Challenges and Barriers Work with a champion who understands the Excellence Model, specific situations and needs, and who can interpret the language and the methodologies to suit the environment. One size does not fit all, so make sure the approach used is the right one for the context. This is not a quick-fix solution, so allow time to be taken to explore the options fully, and to judge success. Developing Leadership and Management Capabilities and Competencies In the challenging and rapidly changing environment in which the HE and FE sectors operate, it is important that it is clearly understood by leaders at all levels that the EFQM Excellence Model is a model which assists change, rather than adds an additional burden to it, and that their commitment, understanding and engagement is critical if step-change improvements are to be made. The Move Towards a Process Orientation The identification of key processes at institutional or unit based level is critical. Ownership of these processes needs to be managed at a senior level, with accountability and responsibility given for performance, management and improvement of the process. The Significance of Partnership and Co-operation The Excellence Model can provide a vehicle for changing the mindset in a productive and pro-active way, but this has to be achieved and demonstrated at every level of the institution. Evidence has demonstrated in practice that staff are more proactive in their approach to tasks, focusing on the outcome rather than the problem, and look outside their traditional boundaries to achieve it. It has also been a way of starting to recognise the added value that people within institutions can bring. Partnering skills is a key competency which needs to be developed across the sector, particularly at leadership and management levels. Key Performance Indicators Are we really measuring excellence? Performance and perception measures need to be set, which can monitor and measure the likely and actual ability of the institution (either at whole organisation, or planning unit level) to achieve its set objectives. The link between strategic objectives set, processes which deliver them and performance indicators which measure performance should be apparent. 35

38 Conclusions Integrated Performance Management Bringing together academic and administrative planning Learning point It is essential for all institutions to have in place a robust and integrated planning process, which determines both business and academic objectives at strategic and operational levels. This should be a process which cascades throughout and across the institution with strategic objectives at corporate level linked to strategic objectives at local level, operational objectives at team level and personal objectives at individual levels. programme on time and to budget, with accurate records on completion for tracking and auditing purposes. This has been achieved by using the project management technique, PRINCE 2 1 for the management of the programme and projects. The PRINCE methodology has been most beneficial in setting up the individual projects with a Project Initiation Document setting up project teams to secure ownership and commitment identifying risks tracking progress 1 Projects In a Controlled Environment ( The Toolkit Approach, led by the EFQM Excellence Model Learning point All institutions must be analysed and supported in growth and development using interventions that compliment growth across aspects of the institutions make-up. If one or more aspect is neglected, then there is a higher risk that long term sustainability will not be achieved as the institution has not grown as a whole integrated unit. 3 Overview analysis of achievement against the programme objectives The objectives of the programme were: To evaluate the benefits of applying the EFQM Excellence Model to Higher Education by: assessing the added value of using the Model as a strategic tool for performance management and governance compared to existing management practices analysing the potential and actual impact of integration into the HE strategic planning process evaluating the synergy between the model and existing management tools and techniques used in the HE sector testing and piloting alternative methods of self-assessment, gauging the suitability of each within the sector, compared to other sectors identifying and building on areas of good management practice benchmarking results to evaluate and mark progress, and performance improvements. We feel that this report and accompanying reports demonstrate that these objectives have been achieved. In addition a further objective set was to manage the development and delivery of the 36

39 Further Work 2003 and beyond.. Improvement activities using the EFQM Excellence Model linked to other appropriate interventions will be continuing in each of our institutions. With further funding awarded from HEFCE as a continuation of the Good Management Practice initiative, it is planned, with new partners and associates, to extend and expand the learning and application of knowledge in this area. GMP334 has been created to provide a platform through which sector specific interventions, materials, support and guidance can be nurtured and developed. The table below gives a brief summary of the work that will be undertaken by this new Consortium, led by Sheffield Hallam University, in partnership with the Universities of Cranfield and Durham, working with Chester College, Leeds University (Leadership, Research and Development Unit), the University of Central Lancashire, the Open University Business School, Glasgow Caledonian University and the Quality Assurance Agency, with links established with Erasmus University in The Netherlands and the engagement of other interested institutions as appropriate. Project Output Outcomes (beneficial changes) Continue working with consortium members and other partners in the development and implementation of the Excellence Model in creative and appropriate ways. Self-assessments and re-assessments will continue to be undertaken. Further self-assessment tools and techniques provided. Further learning and adaptation of the tools and techniques being developed for the sector. The development of approaches to benchmarking to enable senior members of institutions to observe good management practice in similar and different contexts. The project will use the opportunity to benchmark against the University of Wisconsin Stout, winner of the US Baldrige Award for education and other quality exemplars in the US. Drawing on existing good practice from other GMP projects, a generic benchmarking process will be developed which will focus on benchmarking identified management issues in a range of areas. A study tour will be completed. Study tour findings published. Enhanced learning by study tour members. Examples of good management practice shared and disseminated. Using the EFQM Excellence Model as a framework for enhancing and developing business plans at planning unit level. Development of an integrated framework bringing together business planning, selfassessment and internal academic quality review, with input from QAA. Adaptation and development of sector specific tools and techniques to help deliver excellence interventions and develop more clearly defined approaches for the sector. Development of a planning template which incorporates the holistic nature of the Excellence Model. An integrated system will be developed, implemented and evaluated. Potential enhancement of the higher education planning and governance system. HE specific tools and models will be developed. Toolkit of approaches will be developed. Planning undertaken incorporating a more holistic approach. Greater level and consistency of planning and development established. Development of a better understanding of the use of the Excellence Model as an integrating framework amongst HEI s and other stakeholder groups such as QAA. Clearer linkages between different models and tools, within a HE context. Understanding of how to use interventions developed for HE. Continued 37

40 Further Work Project Output Outcomes (beneficial changes) Development of case study material relating to the implementation of approaches to process management. Identification of the application of the Excellence Model to enhance organisational learning in relation to Leadership, Governance and Management with particular emphasis on corporate responsibility and sustainability. The application of the Excellence Model to enhance leadership effectiveness, with the development of HE specific interventions to support this. Development of business case for a sustainable resource to deliver sector specific training programmes and materials relating to the introduction and implementation of Excellence Model and associated good management practice. Examples of high level process models for institutions developed. Process management methodologies will be compared and contrasted. Benefits of process management identified. Links to leadership (competence development) management and governance (management processes) developed. Application to leadership, governance and management will be assessed. Significance for corporate responsibility and sustainability will be assessed (understanding European Corporate Sustainability Framework being developed by Erasmus University). Benefits of 360 degree feedback evaluated and comparisons will be made with experience in other sectors. Key leadership competencies for HE will be identified. Business case will be completed. Partners identified. Market testing and analysis of need will be undertaken. Potential for consultancy support will be evaluated. Evaluation of benefits of developing approaches to process management in terms of enhanced performance (efficiency, effectiveness, organisational learning) and stakeholder satisfaction. Evaluation of impact on organisational restructuring. Identification of organisation learning strategies for leadership, governance and management of universities. Understanding of organisational learning-based strategies vs. efficiencybased strategies and beneficial impact on organisational trust, commitment and effectiveness. Enhanced leadership competence and capability. Sustainable resources for the sector developed. Learning shared with sector. Sector provided with the potential for significant improvements in Leadership, Management and Governance. Dissemination and engagement in the learning with the sector. Continuing annual conference programme will be developed (Mirror of Truth 4). Supporting seminars and workshops delivered to specific target groups e.g. PVC s, senior administrators. Web site will be extended. Good management practice shared. Further development of ideas. Engagement of the sector in practical ways. Table 5 GMP334 Programme Summary 38

41 Appendices 1 Overview and description of the GMP143 Programme The Consortium for Excellence in Higher Education has been led by Sheffield Hallam University and has included the Universities of Cranfield, Durham, Salford, Ulster and Dearne Valley College (FE representative). The GMP143 Programme has been part funded under the Developing Good Management Practice HEFCE initiative (99/54). The University of Ulster was funded and supported by DEL. The programme (which contained 18 projects) had a life span of three years. Its main aim was to evaluate the benefits of introducing and implementing the EFQM Excellence Model into the Higher Education Sector. Communication projects The 5 communication projects included Mirror of Truth conferences for each year of the programme, the development and maintenance of a programme web site ( and a final programme report which has brought together the findings of the programme over the three years. The Programme overall, and each project, has been planned and managed using a light-touch project management method, based on the PRINCE2 ( project management methodology. This has helped to provide clarity, direction and purpose to each of the projects, as well as enabling linkages to be made and learning to be transferred more easily. Funding for the programme was awarded by HEFCE on 14 April The programme commenced in May 2000 and concluded in May The 18 projects undertaken fall into 4 main areas, which can be summarised as follows: Self-assessment projects Six projects covering each institution (Sheffield Hallam, the Universities of Cranfield, Durham, Salford, Ulster and Dearne Valley College) tested the implementation of self-assessment activities against the EFQM Excellence Model. Assessments took place in range of areas schools, departments, research institutes, cross college and faculty wide. Each institution tested different self-assessment methodologies, rather than just using one. This added greatly to the richness of the learning. Work has also been undertaken in some areas to investigate the integration and alignment potential with other aspects of quality assurance and performance management. Mapping and research projects The five projects in this area sought to address the relationship, inter-relationship, synergy and gaps between the EFQM Excellence Model and other management tools, models, concepts and auditing frameworks that are used within an HE and FE environment. These aimed to reduce confusion across the sector about where each may fit within an organisation compared to another. Benchmarking projects The two benchmarking projects aimed to compare the work that was being undertaken, with educational institutions internationally who are exemplars of excellence, and with other private and public sector organisations within the UK who have won quality awards. These projects have enabled the development, enhancement and evolution of all methodologies and approaches to ensure that they were as excellent as they could be when compared to the best. 39

42 Appendices 2 Outline of each project within the GMP143 Programme Project Reference Project Description Project Lead GMP143 Programme Management GMP143/SA/SHU GMP143/SA/CR GMP143/SA/DV GMP143/SA/DU GMP143/SA/SA GMP143/SA/UL GMP143/Mgtmodels GMP143/Mgttools GMP143/QAA GMP143/Learning Organisation GMP143/Benchmarking Quality & Exemplars GMP143/Conference (1, 2 and 3) GMP143/Web Programme management using a PRINCE2 project management framework. Introducing self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model within Sheffield Hallam University. Introducing self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model within the School of SIMS at Cranfield University. Introducing self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model across Dearne Valley College and integrating this with the Common Inspection Framework. Introducing self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model within Van Mildert College at the University of Durham. Introducing self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model within three faculties of Salford University. Introducing self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model within two departments within the University of Ulster. Comparing and contrasting the EFQM Excellence Model with Balanced Scorecard, Six Sigma, Service Pilot and the Service Triangle. Comparing and contrasting the EFQM Excellence Model with Investors in People, ISO9000, and Charter Mark. Comparing and contrasting the EFQM Excellence Model with the principles and framework of the new QAA Quality Assurance Framework. Comparing and contrasting the EFQM Excellence Model with the Learning Organisation concept. Benchmarking our developing methodologies with national and international institutions within the HE and FE sectors, and benchmarking our developing methodologies with exemplars in the UK public and private sectors. Dissemination and engagement of the FE and HE sectors three conferences delivered Mirror of Truth Dissemination and engagement nationally and internationally, sharing learning and encouraging others to engage with the learning. Carol Steed, Sheffield Hallam University Carol Steed, Sheffield Hallam University Andrew Johnstone, Cranfield University Tony De Ath and Sally Blunt, Dearne Valley College John Hirst, University of Durham Mick Hides and Jill Wild, Salford University Claire Browning, University of Ulster Mike Pupius, Sheffield Hallam University Sally Blunt, Dearne Valley College Carol Steed, Sheffield Hallam University John Hirst, University of Durham Mike Pupius, Sheffield Hallam University Carol Steed, Sheffield Hallam University Carol Steed, Sheffield Hallam University 40

43 Appendices 3 Summary of outputs and outcomes from the GMP143 Programme GMP143 Programme Management Co-ordinated management of the programme using a light-touch version of PRINCE2 project management methodology. All projects clearly defined and owned All projects delivered on time, achieving objectives as stated and agreed at the start of the programme Momentum of programme maintained throughout Consistency and rigour of reporting, evaluation and learning amongst all Consortium members High degree of co-ordination, collaboration and learning across Consortium members Self-assessment using the EFQM Excellence Model Six projects - one in each institution: Sheffield Hallam, Cranfield, Durham, Salford, Ulster and Dearne Valley College Most areas of Sheffield Hallam University (at business unit level) now using Excellence principles (rather than the original planned pilot areas), with many areas undertaking full assessments and re-assessments. Examples of success in this area include the adoption of a greater customer focus and the development of a new partnering policy by our Facilities Directorate; a reorganisation based on process orientation within Academic Registry; and the recognition of a need to focus on management and business planning as well as academic planning in some academic schools. Sheffield Hallam is also undertaking a Corporate Review, adopting a process orientation as part of this process. It has also undertaking a number of process review projects (such as timetabling, enrolment, student finances), and has introduced a University wide Leadership and Management Development Programme. This has been influenced and shaped by the EFQM work undertaken across the University. A wider recommendation for the whole of the University of Durham to adopt this approach, moving the work on significantly from the original College pilot. Engagement and active involvement of the senior management team at the University of Salford in self-assessment activities, with further exploration of University wide potential. Over 100 trained EFQM standard assessors across the Consortium, many of whom are in leadership and management positions, with many more receiving specifically tailored training delivered internally by the Project Leaders and Managers. Continued development of a tool-kit of self-assessment tools and techniques for the HE sector, which have been piloted and tested internally. The introduction of new approaches in many areas. Examples include: the introduction of a new staff development and appraisal system for a School in Cranfield, the introduction of student surveys in Durham, the integration of academic and management quality systems with business planning in Dearne Valley College, the development of a process management approach in both Salford and Sheffield Hallam, The introduction of new internal communications frameworks in both Cranfield and Ulster. Cultural change now starting to be evident in a number of the Consortium institutions. One example of this is at Sheffield Hallam University where there is now a much greater focus and awareness of working collaboratively within the University, which has started to break down hierarchical barriers. The concept of internal customers and considering service development and delivery from a process angle has resulted in a number of cross-functional working groups being established, and department/school joint partnership workshops being held. Benchmarking specific activities within and outside the sector Two key projects which have benchmarked our developing methodologies within HE outside the UK, and with exemplars within the UK in the private and public sector, but outside HE. Learning incorporated into projects in a timely and appropriate way through Programme and Advisory Board meetings, and on an individual basis. Tools, techniques and models considered and adopted where appropriate, such as process mapping methods and maps. Reports written and presentations given on the findings of this work, as well as training given to staff within Consortium institutions about the different types of benchmarking and their respective benefits. The development and launch of the European Education Community of Practice has been used to gather and share further learning, as well as benchmark widely through meetings and individual contacts/visits. All presentations and notes are disseminated on the Consortium website. ( 41

44 Appendices Mapping and research work to enhance understanding Four key projects which have mapped the EFQM Excellence Model with the QAA academic quality framework; management models including the balanced scorecard, six sigma, service pilot and the service triangle; management tools including Investors in People, Charter Mark and ISO9000; and the Learning Organisation concept. Several published reports (available on the Consortium website) outlining the inter-relationships and differences between the EFQM Excellence Model and these particular interventions. Presentations at conferences on the findings of the different elements of this research. Practical application of this learning within institutions, such as the bringing together of IiP and EFQM within a School in Sheffield Hallam University to build an integrated School development plan. Greater understanding an awareness of the connected nature of each of these models and tools, and their complimentary rather than conflicting natures, for example, some schools and departments are using the Excellence Model as an overarching checking mechanism, but then using elements such as the balanced scorecard to help develop Key Performance Indicators more precisely. Communication and dissemination activity Four key projects have driven the main dissemination activity. These have been the delivery of three conferences, and the setting up and maintenance of the website. Other activities have also been undertaken to support the sharing of learning and knowledge. Programme specific activities: Mirror of Truth conference in June 2001, with over 140 delegates representing 62 organisations. Mirror of Truth 2 conference in June 2002 (held jointly with GMP200), with 120 delegates. Mirror of Truth 3 conference planned for June 2003 (jointly with GMP200), with planned target of 150 delegates. Website launched within one month of the programme being live, and updated regularly since, receiving national and international interest. Reference: Conference Presentations and/or awareness raising/interactive workshops: The purpose has been to subject our learning to informed critique, to learn from other conference/workshop delegates and to establish a sound base of academic credibility. Significant recognition has been gained. Launch of Education Community of Practice (chaired by Sheffield Hallam University) with over 100 members covering over 20 different countries. 6 meetings held so far, with further meetings planned. International links with the US have also been established. Association of University Administrators Conference (AUA) 2002 Academic Registrars Council Meeting (ARC) Risk Management GMP Consortium Conference 2002 Marketing Excellence GMP Consortium Meeting Public Sector Excellence Conference 2002 HEFCE GMP conference 2002 Society for Research in Higher Education Conference (SRHE), Cambridge, 2001 European Foundation for Quality Management Learning Edge Conference, Paris 2002 BQF Education and Training Group, 2002 European Organisation for Quality World Congresses, 2000, 2002 Civil Service College Public Sector Excellence Conference, 2002 Open University Business School Conference 2002 Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) CAF meeting Other presentations internationally by invitation: St Petersburg Electro-technical University Slovenia EFQM Winners Conference Hungarian EFQM Winners Conference Spain University of Malaga Summer School Turkey 600 delegates from the Education sector across Turkey, organised as part of EFQM Education Community of practice activity Higher Learning Commission, Chicago, US and the Academic Quality Improvement Project 42

45 Appendices 4 Further background on the evolution of excellence Originating from the ideas of process quality and control, the concept of quality having a much wider dimension was first introduced by W. Edwards Deming in the 1950 s. Deming (1986) set out an approach to total quality management by the introduction of his now famous 14 points. In addition to promoting product or service quality and more efficient business processes, it also gave industry a human face. His work in Japan saw the creation in 1965 of the now coveted Deming Prize which is awarded annually to Japanese companies, worker groups and individuals who have distinguished themselves in the area of total quality. Juran (1988) built on Deming s philosophies, defining quality as fitness for use in terms of design, conformance, availability, safety and field use. Unlike Deming, he focused on top-down management and technical methods rather than worker pride and satisfaction. Juran developed his TQM message around 10 key steps. He continued to build on Deming s work by communicating that quality control was an integral part of management at all levels, not just the work of a special quality control department. It was from this that quality circles were created the practice where quality improvement meetings were held at all levels of the organisation. Although these experts have differing opinions in certain areas, a number of key themes emerged: Inspection is never the answer to quality improvement. Involvement of, and leadership by, top management are essential to the necessary culture of commitment to quality. A program for quality requires organisation-wide efforts and long term commitment, accompanied by the necessary investment in training. Quality is first and schedules are secondary. Oakland (1999) has furthered the work of TQM in Britain. He has been able to explain the theory of TQM, and then demonstrate the practical application of his theory in practice. Oakland has further developed the thinking behind TQM and its integration into a company s strategy. He developed a model which he summarised in five points, and defined total quality management as a comprehensive approach to improving competitiveness, effectiveness and flexibility through planning, organising, and understanding each activity, and involving each individual at each level. Ishikawa (1990) is known as the Father of Quality Circles. He continued to develop ideas through the 1960 s and created the fish bone or Ishikawa diagram as a management problemsolving tool which is used by quality circles and quality improvement teams world-wide. He also introduced seven basic tools which were viewed as indispensable for quality control. These are Pareto analysis, fishbone diagrams, stratification, tally charts, histograms, scatter diagrams and control charts. Crosby (1979) popularised total quality through his book Quality is Free. He built on the thinking of Deming and Juran, and added his idea that quality is conformance to requirement. His notion of a zero defects goal as something practical to aim for was based on the fact that poor quality on average was costing companies about 20% of their revenue. Crosby cited four new essentials of quality management which he calls the absolutes, and also introduced his own 14 points for success. Crosby stressed motivation and planning were key rather than statistical process control. 43

46 Appendices As a result of this evolution in quality thinking, TQM became a driving force for quality improvement within many organisations across the world. It was this holistic approach that was considered and evolved by those 14 businesses, whose mission and driving force was to develop these concepts into something that would encourage sustainable excellence in Europe and led to the formation of EFQM. Their objectives were: To stimulate, and where necessary, to assist management in adopting and applying the principles of Total Quality Management, and to improve the competitiveness of European industry. Taking into account research from across the world on other quality awards and systems, such as the Baldrige Award in America, and the Deming Prize in Japan, the EFQM launched the European Quality Award in This was initially seen as a way of to identify role models within Europe, recognising their excellence and encouraging them to benchmark and lead others. Supporting the award, a range of criteria had been developed against which organisations were assessed. This built on the criteria used for the Baldrige Award, but included the additional features of business results and impact on society. The model and award scheme has been developed over the past ten years to reflect the diversity of the economy and organisations that exist. In 1995 the Public Sector Award was launched along with a revised model against which Public Sector organisations could assess themselves. In 1996 the SME Award and model was launched, followed in the same year by the launch of an Award for operational units. In 1999 the Public and Voluntary Sector Model was launched, which has been the Model that has been used in both further and higher education sectors. Now in 2003, the Model has again been refreshed and updated. 44

47 Appendices 5 List of Figures and Tables List of Figures Figure 1 The Evolution of the Excellence Concept...7 Figure 2 The simple model for improved performance...10 Figure 3 The EFQM Excellence Model...11 Figure 4 The EFQM Excellence Model Criteria and Criterion Parts...11 Figure 5 The EFQM Excellence Model Dynamics...11 Figure 6 RADAR Logic...12 Figure 7 Comparison of the Excellence Model and other management models and tools...13 Figure 8 Accessing The EFQM Excellence Model - Breaking the Model down...15 Figure 9 Accessing The EFQM Excellence Model - Breaking the Institution Down...16 Figure 10 Simple assessment concept...17 Figure 11 Overview of inputs and outputs of self-assessment...17 Figure 12 The Excellence Journey...17 Figure 13 Integration of the EFQM Excellence Model with Business Planning...18 Figure 14 The recognition of process definition, working and management...25 Figure 15 The Relationship Journey...27 Figure 16 The Balanced Scorecard (after Kaplan and Norton)...28 Figure 17 Benchmark score comparison trend data...29 Figure 18 The potential for an Integrated Performance Management approach...30 Figure 19 Institutional change focus...31 List of Tables Table 1 The Fundamental Concepts of Excellence...8 Table 2 Key Benefits of implementing an excellence approach...19 Table 3 Key Barriers to embracing and implementing the concepts of excellence...20 Table 4 Key Benefits evidenced when mapped against the Excellence Model...21 Table 5 GMP334 Programme Summary

48 Appendices 6 Glossary ALI BQF CIF DEL DFES EFQM EQA FE GMP HE HEFCE IiP ISO KPIs Ofsted QAA RAE TQM US VC Adult Learning Inspectorate British Quality Foundation Common Inspection Framework Department of Employment and Learning Department for Education and Skills European Foundation for Quality Management European Quality Award Further Education Good Management Practice Higher Education Higher Education Funding Council for England Investors in People International Organisation for Standardisation Key Performance Indicators Office for Standards in Education Quality Assurance Agency Research Assessment Exercise Total Quality Management United States Vice Chancellor 46

49 Notes 47

50 Notes 48

51 Acknowledgements This publication draws on the experience and knowledge gained by a range of institutions from with the Higher and Further Education sectors, bringing together aspects of learning from the HEFCE funded Good Management Practice (GMP143) Programme that was undertaken between April 1999 and March The programme was led and directed by Mike Pupius, Director of Organisational Excellence, Sheffield Hallam University, and managed by Carol Steed, Organisational Excellence Manager, Sheffield Hallam University. Carol Steed and Mike Pupius have been the main authors of this Summary Report. Representatives from the other Consortia institutions have critically reviewed and added to the development of this publication. They are: Sally Blunt, Assistant Principal (Curriculum and Quality), Dearne Valley College Claire Browning, (former) EFQM Project Manager, University of Ulster Tony De Ath, Head of Human Resources, Dearne Valley College Mick Hides, Research Fellow, University of Salford John Hirst, Bursar, Van Mildert College, University of Durham Andrew Johnstone, Lecturer, University of Cranfield Acknowledgement is also given to our Advisory Board members, who have supported the programme directly and indirectly on a voluntary basis for three years. These are: Professor Diana Green (Chair), Vice Chancellor, Sheffield Hallam University Bob Allen-Turl, Former CEO, TNT Award Office Roger Cliffe, Former Corporate Quality Director, Lloyds TSB Steve Dougill, Quality Manager, Xerox UK Sandy Goulding, Head of Quality Assurance and Educational Development, Department of Health Pramod Philip, Consultant, HEFCE Ian Raisbeck, Former Director of Business Excellence, Royal Mail John Rushforth, Director of Widening Participation, HEFCE Dr Martin Samuels, (Formerly Project Director for the Cabinet Office Public Sector Benchmarking and Excellence Model Programmes) Frank Steer, Director General the Institute of Quality Assurance and President of the European Organisation for Quality Ken Watling, Head of Efficiency and Private Finance Unit, HM Customs and Excise Kevin Wyber, HM Customs and Excise, Manager Public Sector Benchmarking Service Ann Kemplay, Head of Staff Development, University of Ulster Jill Wild, Senior Lecturer, School of Nursing, University of Salford. The programme has benefited from a range of other valuable contributions from across all of our institutions. Members of staff from academic, administrative and technical backgrounds have contributed their time, expertise and experience in a wide variety of ways, which has proved invaluable in generating the richness of evidence that can be found in our publications. We also acknowledge and give thanks for the support from colleagues within our respective institutions, who have helped us to acquire, further develop and extend our collective learning, for the benefit of others across the sector.

52 For further copies of this publication, please contact Centre for Integral Excellence Sheffield Hallam University Howard Street Sheffield S1 1WB Tel: /2044 Fax: or 50