Survey Report Applying Quality Management Framework in Innovation Agencies - Report based on findings of the 1 st Pilot Assessment in spring 2010

Document ID: IPF-10-019 Tekes Dno: 688456 VINNOVA Dno: 2009-04589 Survey Report Applying Quality Management Framework in Innovation Agencies - Report based on findings of the 1 st Pilot Assessment in spring 2010 31.08.2010 Deliverable D4.1 Survey Report INNO-Partnering Forum

Description of the deliverable This report is a formal delivery D4.1 within WP4 of the INNO-Partnering Forum (IPF) project. The report shortly explains the background for applying a Quality Management Framework in an innovation agency (or an equivalent organisation). The approach for the studying and promoting knowledge of these tools chosen by INNO-Partnering Forum is described, together with a summary of the first results from the Pilot Training in Brussels and Pilot Assessment in Helsinki in May-June 2010. Surveying organizations outside the consortium for use of Quality Management Frameworks, foreseen in the original description of the work, will be considered as a part of activation for participation in an open call/workshop arranged by the INNO-Partnering Forum. This report has been compiled in the first place for the internal use of the INNO- Partnering Forum. Stockholm 2010-08-31 Jenni Nordborg Project Coordinator INNO-Partnering Forum Dissemination level: The following dissemination level is set for this report/deliverable in accordance with the contract and discussions with the Commission services: PU =Public. PAGE 2

This report was prepared by: Heikki Uusi-Honko and Silja Leinonen Tekes Contact details: Heikki Uusi-Honko Tekes P.O.Box 69 FI-00101 Helsinki, FInland Phone: +358 50 5577 825 e-mail: heikki.uusi-honko@tekes.fi Disclaimer: The views expressed in this report are those of the authors and the Pilot Assessment Team. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion or position of the European Commission and in no way commit the involved organisations. PAGE 3

Applying Quality Management Framework in Innovation Agencies Report based on findings of the 1st Pilot Assessment using the EFQM Model in spring 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Background... 5 1.1 The INNO-Partnering Forum... 5 1.2 The concepts of quality, efficiency and effectiveness... 5 1.3 The EFQM Excellence Model... 7 1.4 Other quality assessment and development tools... 10 1.4.1 CAF Model... 10 1.4.2 Smart Agency / TAFTIE Wheel... 11 1.4.3 ISO 9000 Management Standard Family... 11 2 WP 4 initial approach to promotion of quality, efficiency and effectiveness and the pilot assessment... 12 2.1 The initial approach and methodological development... 12 2.2 Pilot assessment... 13 3 Next stages of the project... 14 3.1 Testing entry-level assessments and identifying good practices... 14 3.2 Dissemination of results... 15 4 Acknowledgements... 16 Appendix 1... 17 PAGE 4

1 Background 1.1 The INNO-Partnering Forum The INNO-Partnering Forum project is an INNO-Net project under the PRO INNO Europe initiative of Directorate General Enterprise and Industry. The initiative aims to contribute to the development of new and better innovation policies, notably by learning from others and sharing experiences. The project will specifically act as an operational platform for mutual learning and exchange of experience, with the general objective to improve the overall quality and efficiency of public innovation support services in Europe. One of the activities suggested for the INNO Partnering Forum, in the PRO INNO Europe Work Programme, was the further development of quality management instruments, notably the EFQM Excellence Model, to better suit the specific needs of innovation agencies. The rationale of this is that good innovation support doesn t comprise only the availability of good instruments and services, but excellent organisational frameworks are also needed to deliver the services efficiently and effectively. Today, in public organisations, high standards in all operations and the accountability for these are obvious prerequisites for good governance. The use of the EFQM Excellence Model in innovation agencies has been studied in an earlier feasibility study project (IMQ Net, 2006-2008) and it is at least sporadically used by a number of agencies around Europe. However, the wide-spread use of the model (or any other Quality Assessment Framework) has proved to be hard to accomplish, probably because of the rather high initial investment in time and effort usually required when starting the Model based assessments 1. It is worth noting that absorbing (quality) principles of good management doesn t have to build initially on assessments, but could perhaps be supported with other types of actions as well. Thus it is possible for the INNO-Partnering Forum Project not only to seek ways to lower the threshold of making the first quality assessment, but also to try to extract and interpret the principles and contents of the Model into guidelines, that might be easier to approach by the management of innovation agencies. 1.2 The concepts of quality, efficiency and effectiveness The overall goal of the INNO-Partnering Forum is to improve the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of European innovation support. In everyday use, these three words are 1 The EFQM has published numerous entry-level tools with the purpose of lowering the threshold of starting the use of the Model principles. For the INNO-Partnering Forum, it s a possibility to do this with innovation agencies specifically in mind. PAGE 5

often connected to a wide array of different meanings. In the picture below, the usual definitions of efficiency and effectiveness, and some concepts related to them, are implicated. Although the picture is simple in appearance, efficiency and effectiveness are actually quite demanding concepts, when it comes to measuring them in practice for an innovation agency or an innovation support programme. The main reason for this is the complex relations that attribute a successful innovation to its prerequisites. Society, economy and environment Societal needs Socio- economic challenges p Indirect consequences, i.e. impacts Direct consequences, i.e. results Organisational level Objectives Money Inputs Production factors Functions Outputs Quality Productivity Economy Efficiency Effectiveness Relevance, Utility Fig 1. Schematic presentation of different issues for operational assessment The concept of quality can be even harder to translate into a simple categorical description. There is an abundance of different verbal definitions for quality, but listing them isn t actually helpful in this context. In practice, it is often a virtuous management practice to avoid the use of the plain word quality because of its ambiguity, whereas PAGE 6

words like quality planning, quality control, and quality improvement again are useful management terms with well defined contents. Neither the EFQM Excellence Model does directly mention quality in any way, but instead makes use of the concept of excellence as the utility being pursued by the use of the Model. However, it may be said that by defining excellence, the Model also implicitly defines organisational quality as the capability to achieve and sustain superior levels of performance that meet or exceed the expectations of all stakeholders. The Model content then establishes a structured way of analysing and assessing excellence as stated by the definition. Superiority in this context means performance exceeding that of the peers, and this open reference frame together with the concept of continuous improvement expressed by the RADAR Logic gives the Model its dynamic characters. 1.3 The EFQM Excellence Model The EFQM Excellence Model is the most widely used quality assessment framework in Europe (ISO 9001 quality standard omitted). The model can be used by all organisations in the pursuit of a shared and deepened understanding of the key strengths and areas of development vis-à-vis satisfying the needs and expectation of their stakeholders and achieving the goals stated by their vision and strategy. In addition to supporting this type of assessment, the model provides its users a common vocabulary and a conceptual model of an organisation, which makes sharing ideas and experiences over business line thresholds easier. There are a number of other resembling tools, but the EFQM Excellence model was chosen for the first pilot assessment in the INNO-Partnering Forum because Its updated 2010 version represents the newest in the field, especially the updated RADAR logic is seen to offer benefits for the analysis and documentation of good practices even in the other work packages of the INNO-partnering project availability of support all over Europe Existing support materials More users, more possibilities for comparisons Introduced initially already in the CIP Call There are certain challenging elements in the utilisation of the model. There is a rather high initial investment in work hours before a conventional external assessment based on the use of the model can take place. Also, as the model is generic in the sense that it suits all organisations, it lacks guidelines and interpretations specific to the public sector or, or even more specifically, to innovation agencies. (Recognising this, the EFQM is going to issue implementation guidelines for the public sector before the end of this year). PAGE 7

Below, a brief description of the model is made for the purpose of sharing information within the INNO-Partnering project. For a complete detailed description of the Model, please refer to the original publication by the EFQM 2. The EFQM Excellence model basically takes a process view on the management of an organisation. Any organisation has to meet the requirements and expectations put on it by its stakeholders, and to manage and arrange its activities accordingly. The model offers a practical framework that guides all types of organisations in developing their core principles, targets, actions, approaches and results to meet the criterions of excellent organisations. It can aid in building well-functioning and clear management structures and also help organisations to better see the results they are capable of achieving. In comparison to other management tools, the EFQM Excellence Model takes a rather holistic and integrative approach to organisational issues. The Model consists of three integrated components, which will be shortly explained below. These components allow organisations to compare themselves with the features of a generic ideal organisation. Using the Model can help organisations to develop in a number of areas, such as achieving results, leadership, creativity, sustainability, partnerships, and perhaps above all, organisational learning and flexibility. The three integrated components are: 1) The Fundamental Concepts of Excellence The Fundamental Concepts of Excellence outline the principles that sustained organisational excellence can be built on. The concepts also present a common vocabulary for management, which eases and structures communication. In the Model, there are eight fundamental concepts: a) Achieving balanced results that are in line with the organisation s mission and targets. b) Adding value to customers through anticipating and listening to customer needs. c) Leading with Vision, Inspiration & Integrity by anticipating future trends and learning from the past, being flexible, and by promoting a creative working culture. d) Managing by Processes that are well-structured and encourage fact-based decision making. e) Succeeding through People excellent organisations value their people and create a culture of empowerment. f) Nurturing Creativity & Innovation by harnessing the creativity of all stakeholders. 2 EFQM Excellence Model 2009 EFQM PAGE 8

g) Building Partnerships excellent organisations seek, develop and maintain trusting relationships with a variety of partners for the benefit of mutual success. h) Taking Responsibility for a Sustainable Future by creating an ethical mindset, clear values and the highest standards for organisational behaviour. 2) The EFQM Excellence Model The core part of the EFQM Excellence Model is a framework based on nine Criteria that comprise the characteristics of excellent organisations. Five of these are Enablers they cover the actions and approaches of the organisations. Four are Results focusing on achievements. Enablers and Results are presented in an integrated relationship, underlining the possibilities for learning, creativity and innovation. The contents in the Criteria are linked to that of the eight Fundamental Concepts; the difference is the structure the Criteria are presented in. Fig 2. The EFQM Excellence Model The 9 Criteria are structured in a number of sub-criteria, which are further specified by a large number of guidance points. Thus the Criteria make it possible to describe the activities and results of an organisation in a rather detailed manner. 3) The RADAR logic The RADAR logic provides a structural approach for mapping out the performance of an organisation embarking from the targets it has set for its results. It covers the issues of the organisation s Approach to a specific function or issue; what the organisation does to PAGE 9

Deploy the approach; what it does to Assess and Refine the approach and its deployment; and the key Results in terms of relevance, usability and performance. The Radar logic is a powerful tool for assessing the general level of performance within the 9 Criteria of the Model. But apart from this, it can be seen as an elaborated version of the classical PDCA or Deming Cycle of Improvement. In this sense, the Radar logic forms a generic management principle guiding the set up of management practices in an organisation. For instance, in the INNO-Partnering Forum, the Radar logic has already given inspiration to how to organize and report Good Practices. Summary of Model characteristics The EFQM Excellence Model is a framework for organisational development, which focuses holistically on the building blocks and features of excellent organisations. It sets the criteria and standards for excellence in an integrative manner. Used optimally, the Model gathers all the management practices of the organisation to form a coherent whole that is open for continuous development and learning, which makes it a framework that enhances organisational creativity and flexibility. The model can be used for creating a common language platform for management and it easily adapts to the specific needs of the organisation benchmarking purposes, for instance. 1.4 Other quality assessment and development tools In addition to the EFQM model, there are a number of other quality development frameworks. Below three of them, the CAF Model, the Smart Agency Model and the ISO 9000 Management Standard, are briefly described. It is worth noting that these frameworks have much in common, and most of the comments and issues discussed in the context of using the EFQM Excellence Model in innovation agencies are relevant for the other models as well. 1.4.1 CAF Model The Common Assessment Framework Model, CAF, is a result of the co-operation amongst the Ministries responsible for Public Administration in member countries. The CAF is inspired by the major Total Quality models in general, and by the EFQM Excellence Model in particular. By and large, the CAF Model establishes a generic public sector interpretation of the EFQM Model content. Another main characteristic is that CAF makes use of a simplified logic for scoring, when compared to the RADAR logic. In many cases, it is said that the CAF Model is slightly easier to start to use in public organisations, but doesn t deliver all the benefits that the EFQM Excellence Model does. There is also some guidance and tools available, e.g., on the web pages of the European Institute of Public Administration. The present version of the CAF Model is from 2006. PAGE 10

For INNO-Partnering Forum, it is expected that most of the results and observations will be relevant towards the use of both the CAF and the EFQM Models. A practical pilot of using the CAF Model could be incorporated in the project. However, recognising that the management cultures of innovation agencies vary a lot and many of them are prone to seek inspiration and references from the private sector, the more generic EFQM Excellence model is chosen as the point of embarking for the project in whole. 1.4.2 Smart Agency / TAFTIE Wheel The TAFTIE Wheel is an approach that was launched under the auspices of TAFTIE, the Association for Technology Implementation in Europe, in 2007. Its purpose is to make additionality a strategic and operational issue that makes agencies more effective in their design and implementation of policy measures. The wheel is in fact a reference model and a tool for assessment of a RTDI Programme, or an agency s Programme Design and implementation Process. Thus it forms a point of embarkment for analysing the programme process of agencies, in addition to to taking up some more general issues in the context of how policy goals are translated into operative objectives of an agency. Fig 3. The TAFTIE Wheel Approach 1.4.3 ISO 9000 Management Standard Family As the ISO 9000 comprises of standards, its focus is on controlling and certifying compliance with a given way of organising the operations of an entity, not in the first place on improving them. Especially for manufacturing companies acting in long and flexible supply chains, a certified level of quality in products and operations has been a basic business requirement for a number of years. In addition, a number of public PAGE 11

organisations have chosen to establish an ISO 9000 based Quality Management System and acquire a certification for it. Here, in many cases, the external auditing and certification works as an excellent motivator for systematic quality work within the organisation. In this family of standards, it is the ISO 9001:2008 Standard that specifically sets out the requirements for a Quality Management System. Especially after its last updates, the ISO Standard is largely based on similar generic Quality Principles as the EFQM Excellence model. Because of this, the elaborations and comments on these principles, in the context of using the EFQM Excellence Model in innovation agencies, are highly relevant for better understanding how an ISO 9000 based management system should look like for an innovation agency. The list of the Quality Principles as defined in the ISO 9000 family is presented below 1. Customer focus 2. Leadership 3. Involvement of people 4. Process approach 5. System approach to management 6. Continual improvement 7. Factual approach to decision making 8. Mutually beneficial supplier relationships 2 WP 4 initial approach to promotion of quality, efficiency and effectiveness and the pilot assessment 2.1 The initial approach and methodological development In its Work Package 4, the INNO-Partnering Forum will make an effort to stimulate and at the same time very much concretise the understanding and adoption of the principles of the EFQM Excellence model in the European innovation agencies. This is done by: 1) establishing and testing an entry-level assessment set-up that is of special interest to innovation agencies 2) Giving a number of concrete examples of good practices in innovation policy implementation PAGE 12

To support results dissemination, guide-lines documentation and interactive seminar are seen as the best options. The goal is to establish an assessment framework that will: Be efficient and not require heavy preparation work Yet tackle a number of issues of central significance for innovation agencies Avoid issues that might be prone to sensitivity, thus encouraging greater openness, exchange of experiences, and wide results dissemination. In addition to developing this assessment set-up, the project will disseminate a number of good practice cases that can serve as a source of renewal for a large number of organisations. The choice of good practices is based on assessments using the EFQM Excellence Model and EFQM assessment methodology, especially the use of the RADAR logics. The EFQM Excellence model is the main conceptual vehicle for examination and structuring the work; however other points of reference (like the CAF) may be used to examine and clarify the issues of special interest for innovation agencies. In the project, the understanding of the EFQM Excellence model is made easier and deepened by the concrete Good Practice examples from the world of innovation agencies. It is expected, that the areas of the model that can be seen to be the most challenging ones in this context are elaborated more thoroughly. Specifically, this could comprise the areas of Adding Value for Customers, Social Results and Key Results in the Model. The good practices are supposed to act as a source for inspiration for all innovation agencies and similar organisations, thus giving a fast impact on their development. 2.2 Pilot assessment In order to gain an initial understanding of the use of the EFQM Model, a pilot peer assessment was conducted at Tekes in June 2010. The assessment was conducted by staff members of organisations participating in the INNO-Partnering Forum (Agency NL, Enterprise Ireland, Technology Strategy Board and Vinnova). The 2-day assessment site visit was preceded by a 2-day training course that was tailored for the project by EFQM in Brussels. As a part of the training, planning of the site visit and the assessment contents was already started, equalling perhaps one day s work that should be seen as a part of the assessment as well as a part of the training. From one single assessment, one shouldn t try to make general observations concerning the content issues. However, it is possible to reflect upon the process itself, its results and costs. Thus, following key findings relevant to the continuing work within the project can be stated: PAGE 13

For a group of peers, it is possible to conduct a meaningful assessment within the timeframe of the pilot assessment (2 assessment days + 2 days of preceding training and planning for the assessment site visit). Assessment by staff members of other innovation agencies is effective, focussing more on issues, where comparisons between peer organisations are of special interest. The key processes and the customer management issues are examples of such issues. The assessment is highly motivating for the assessors, as it gives them an outstanding opportunity for benchmarking. An effective training of the assessors (preferably as a team) is an absolute prerequisite for success. Also, the contents of the assessment need to be carefully defined to match with the timeframe; e.g., in the pilot assessment no time was used for scoring, and the assessment team could therefore put more time into finalising the textual feedback. The preparation of suitable materials for the use of the assessment team (description of the organisation and its strategy, internal procedures and results) requires a sizable investment in time and effort. For Tekes, the workload in this case was approximately 1 person month. This is seen to be too much for the following assessments. On a general level, the fundamental concepts of the EFQM model serve as an inspiration for organisational development. For the INNO-Partnering forum, the renewed RADAR logic was found a productive tool that may be utilised in forming a structured approach for a good practice description. The background materials prepared by Tekes and the Feedback Report prepared by the assessment team can be made available by request. 3 Next stages of the project 3.1 Testing entry-level assessments and identifying good practices One of the thresholds facing the potential user of the model is the rather high initial investment in work hours before a conventional external assessment can take place. To help organisations on their way to use the model, EFQM has published additional materials like checklists, workbooks etc. Nevertheless, as the model is generic in the sense that it suits all organisations, it doesn t contain guidance or interpretations specific to the public sector or, even more specifically, to innovation agencies. PAGE 14

One of the timely challenges for all innovation agencies is to learn to be very effective in adding value for their customers, and at the same time be very efficient in running their key processes. The project will concentrate its near future work on these issues specially. It is a good option for the INNO-Partnering Forum to establish a focussed assessment set-up that doesn t need all that much time and effort, and tackles questions with immediately recognisable value for innovation agencies and similar organisations. Thus it would be possible to lower the initial threshold of starting to use the model and absorb its principles. At the moment, it seems that a peer assessment focussing on two of the Fundamental Concepts of Excellence of the EFQM Model, Adding Value for Customers and Managing by Processes could bring about a lot of issues that are of central interest for any organisation implementing innovation policies. This would mean that viable results could be achieved by conducting an assessment that represents maybe 20-30 % of the workload of a full EFQM assessment. The viability of this approach will next be tested in 2 or 3 peer assessments within the consortium. Another type of support for entry-level assessments that should be studied by INNO- Partnering Forum is support for conducting good quality self-assessments. The possibility to support, in various ways, the carrying out of self-assessments and validating their results could be an activity that could continue long after this actual project has ended. Further discussions concerning this strain of activity is taking place early autumn 2010. As a part of the assessments, identification of good practices will take place. The purpose of the project is to disseminate the good practices in connection to the guideline report. They are examples of agency practices where the principles described by the EFQM Model have been realised in an excellent way. 3.2 Dissemination of results By early 2011, the project should have accumulated enough insights and experiences to support the dissemination of the first results, at the same time as the project is opened for content contributions by additional organisations. This could happen in form of open call for participation, supported by publishing a draft version of the Model Guidelines for innovation agencies at the same time. Alternatively, a seminar or a module in a more generic seminar could act as a vehicle for presenting the results. The guidelines for the effective application of the principles of EFQM Excellence Model in innovation agencies is expected to be one of the main deliverables of the project. The guidelines will discuss the model principles and contents, and include practical examples of good practices. The idea of the guidelines is not to reproduce the contents of the model, and other materials published by the EFQM, but rather complement these from the viewpoint of applying them in innovation agencies. Concrete examples, and interpretations and suggestions elaborated for this given type of organizations is PAGE 15

foreseen to help the adaption of the principles, as well as bring forth the best practices in a structured way. In Appendix 1, some issues that are at the moment seen to be of central interest for the guidelines are briefly discussed. 4 Acknowledgements The EFQM Excellence Model and RADAR are registered trademarks of the European Foundation of Quality Management. The kind cooperation of the Foundation in arranging a tailored training for the project participants and supporting the Pilot Assessment is acknowledged. PAGE 16

Appendix 1 Below, three concepts that are of key importance for applying the EFQM Excellence Model in innovation agencies are elaborated shortly. Although the idea of guidelines report is to give very concrete guidance to practitioners in the end of this project, the text here is more theoretical and intended to open up the issues for scrutiny and discussion within the project group. 1) Customer One of the Fundamental Concepts of Excellence is Adding Value for Customers. The concept of customer in public organisations causes often lengthy discussions. There are cultural differences between countries as well: while it is quite normal to refer to the immediate users of public sector services as customers in UK, in Sweden this would be debated. The problem is really one of terminology, as it is of course generally agreed that for an innovation agency it is necessary to meet the expectations of both the companies immediately making use of the services and those of the government/citizens. In general, it may well be motivated that different public organisations approach their stakeholders with a language of their own. Cultures are different; also the main tasks and governance structures differ from one organisation to another. However, establishing a common stakeholder map for an innovation agency with reference to the structure behind the EFQM Excellence Model is a worthwhile exercise that in an integrated way clarifies the roles and expectations of different parties. This also helps to see what is viable to interpret as Customer Results, Society Results and Key Results. The key message that analysing Customer should deliver is two-fold. Firstly, it is important to see that for a public organisation to-day, customer (as the party immediately making use of the services given) should be seen as the main source of innovation and feedback as what comes to improving processes and services, reducing red tape, etc. Secondly, this shouldn t be in conflict with the organisations fundamental task of producing public value. 2) Society results The EFQM Model Criterion 8, Society Results, comprises the assessment of the perceptions of the organisation as expressed by relevant external stakeholders, as well as internal measurements reflecting and anticipating these external perceptions. Sometimes, the relevant body of external stakeholders may be presented, e.g., by an NGO, but basically the responsibility to monitor the needs and expectations of external stakeholders covers the whole society. In most organisations, the overall image, reputation and environmental or social performance are at least considered when assessing this criterion. The critical issues may vary between, e.g., different industry PAGE 17

lines, nevertheless all organisations are depending on how they are perceived by their stakeholders. In assessments taking place in public organisations, even this criterion is oftentimes a subject for lengthy and cumbersome discussions. As the whole raison d être of any public organisation is creating public value, and hence results for the society as a whole, the correct interpretation of this criterion is not obvious. For innovation agencies specifically, the straightforward interpretation is also complicated by the usually very wide definition of key results (which are considered in the Criterion 9). The wide definition of key results is in coherence with the extremely wide scope of today s innovation policy. For example, the results of the agency s support for development of new environmental technologies might better be considered as a part of the Key Results, than a part of the Society Results 3. 3) Key results Regarding the results, the RADAR -logic of the EFQM Excellence Model emphasises the relevance and the usability of the measurements used by the organisation. Relevance in this case denotes that the measurements must reflect the organisation s success in its key tasks and its strategy; usability means that the measurements should be suitable for use in the actual management of the organisation and its operative actions. To set up a measurement system that meets both these requirements is a demanding task for any innovation agency. Private sector organisations usually have a well defined overall goal of creating economic value added, while public organisations most often pursue a more complex set of utilities 4. (Although similarities between different types of organisations are to be emphasised, a difference should indeed be seen here. By nature, public organisations should be accountable for endeavours that cannot be run on market conditions alone, with complex tasks including non-economical goals. Another way of looking at this is that public sector entities with clear and exclusive economic goals can be held good canditates for privatisation.) In Criterion 9, the focus is on the performance level in relation to the expectations and needs of an organisation s key stakeholders. Measuring the key results of an innovation 3 Archie Carroll, one of the researchers and authors active in the field of Corporate Social Responsibility, has established a four segmented model of a firm s responsibilities, where the simple economic responsibility towards the shareholders is augmented by legal, ethical and discretionary responsibilities. In addition to best practice examples, this type of structures and typologies are helpful for the interpretation of Society Results 4 Public value can almost intuitively be understood as the public sector equivalent of shareholder value in the private sector. Harvard professor Mark H. Moore has established a categorization of the constituents of public value that should be helpful in giving guidance to what kind of results should be considered for in Key Results. As said before, attribution of innovations as a result to all the different framework conditions, services, capacities and skills that have contributed to their success is not a straightforward task. Good practice examples can define the state-of-the-art level of performance measurement. PAGE 18

agency is an extremely demanding task. The innovation process contains several elements, and the results of innovation activities can seldom be easily attributed to any one activity alone. In most cases, expert evaluations, often very rigorous, are seen as the ultimate mechanism for getting feed back on the fulfillment of the agency s tasks and its results regarding the national economy and the society. Yet, this type of feedback by expert panels, etc., while extremely relevant, isn t necessarily helpful in the management of day-to-day activities. Obviously, there is a need for (operative) measurements, that in a reliable manner reflect the state of activities with a practical time resolution. In the picture below, a conseptual presentation of different measurement levels is presented for an agency that is expected to deliver results within the four categories in the Impact area of the picture. The impacts on society are to a great part measured by various types of assessments. The practical daily management, however, must rely on input measurements and project level results data. A good presentation of an agency s key results comprises results on both these levels, and communicates the relations between these. Fig. 4. Example of an Impact Model depicting the conceptual relations between the issues followed in assessing and monitoring an agency s key results. PAGE 19