|

What is an organizational assessment? A Malcom Baldrige-style organizational assessment is a very comprehensive, factual and objective appraisal
of how the organization is managed using Baldrige (or similar) criteria, it examines the following aspects of an organization:
- how the organization is led, in order to
provide vision and direction
- how appropriate
information is gathered and used to plan for the future
- how
people's talents are developed and harnessed
- how
the organization determines exactly what its customers need -- and sets out to meet these needs
- how the flow of work is organized, to eliminate waste and error, and hence improve products and services
- how the organization is performing, from various perspectives:-
customer/marketplace, employee morale and involvement, productivity, efficiency, and financial performance.

Gartman and Associates offer
|
|
Organizational Self-Assessment
Course Number 402 S I N
874-4
4 Days
This four-day course is designed to prepare
participants in the use of the MBNQA criteria for organizational self-assessment and improvement. The criteria are discussed
in-depth. Approximately 20 hours of homework is required of all attendees prior to the class. The homework will serve as a
basis for the group exercises used in the class to teach the scoring system. Evaluation of a case study leads to an understanding
of the process. This includes an understanding of the differences in applying scoring criteria to approach, deployment and
results. Methodology on how to conduct an organizational self- assessment audit, evaluate the results, and present the findings
to leadership is taught in the course. Upon completion of this course a participant should be able to serve as a team member
conducting an organizational self-assessment using the MBNOA criteria. The participant should then be able to assist the organization
in establishing an improvement process to enhance customer satisfaction.
Class size limited to 30
|

|
|
What are the main benefits
of an assessment?
A properly designed and executed
assessment achieves all of the following benefits:
- it builds a commitment to change among the key players
- it provides a reliable, repeatable method of identifying
the 'vital few' areas for improvement -- those issues which have the most leverage in improving performance
- it provides the essential starting point for developing
a detailed (project-by-project) improvement plan
- it provides a way of driving continuous improvement
year after year -- by building an assessment step into the annual planning cycle.

How does this process differ from others?
What makes this process different from other types of
audit or review is mainly the criteria used -- such as the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, the Canada Awards for
Excellence or the President's Quality Award. These criteria are superb, refined instruments, which have been developed
and fine-tuned over more than a decade by the foremost experts in this field.

What does the assessment process look
like?
The assessment process typically
looks something like this.
The first, all-important step is to provide an education
and planning session to engage the senior executives. This is designed to:
- clarify for them the assessment goals, potential benefits,
and the overall process
- ensure that they understand and accept the criteria
to be used
- give them a 'taste' of how self assessment works, so
that they understand the nature of the beast (it very different from an audit, for example)
- set their expectations regarding the rest of the process
and the outcomes
- ensure that they understand their role -- and especially
that they must take action at the end, based upon the findings.
The next step is data gathering. This is normally
done by an internal assessment team, after suitable training. The assessment team interviews a cross-section of the organization,
using both individual interviews (for senior people) and group interviews (for front line staff). During the data gathering
process, team members document what they learn from each interview, and share this information with the rest of the team.
Once the interviews are complete, the team can review
what it has learned and develop the findings, with guidance from an outside expert. These findings are set out in a
'feedback report', which follows the structure of the criteria and identifies strengths and areas for improvement in each
category. Finally, based upon all of this information, they develop a few recommendations -- identifying the 'vital few' priorities
for improvement that have the most leverage.
The next step is sharing of the findings with
the executives. This is where the 'rubber hits the road' in the sense that this is a critical session, where the executives
can become upset or go into denial. However, if all the earlier steps in the process have been conducted properly then this
session will go smoothly, and the executives will accept the report in full -- after a few hours of careful listening and
intense discussion.
The stage is now set for developing improvement plans.
This is typically carried out in a 1-day planning workshop very soon after the feedback report was delivered. The internal
team members participate and make an excellent contribution during this workshop, due to the experience that they have gained.
Once this is done, all that remains is implementation and follow-through.
This is a typical assessment. There are also
other approaches, some designed for greater speed and simplicity (e.g. for organizations just starting out), others for greater
thoroughness (e.g. for high-performing organizations).

The assessment process is used to:
- build commitment and engage key
players
- identify the 'vital few' areas
for improvement
- prepare an improvement plan.
Although the need for change may be clear, many organizations
have great difficulty in achieving a consensus regarding what to tackle first. If there are 12 members of the senior management
team -- all competent, all committed to doing their best for the organization -- then there will be at least 12 opinions regarding
what to do. This is because each is very aware of his or her departmental goals, feels very responsible for delivering on
these commitments, and is very aware of the departmental issues that are causing difficulties. Since they all have different
information and different perspectives, there is little prospect of achieving consensus on what to do.
In contrast, when the assessment process is complete,
there is a strong alignment. Everyone in the group is now working with a common frame of reference (the criteria) and everyone
has the same information regarding the current state (the final report from the process). Also, since everyone is looking
at the organization from an overall system viewpoint, it becomes obvious that functional/departmental issues are secondary
to improving overall performance. In this situation, it is easy to develop a consensus.
Experience with this process has demonstrated time after
time that:
given the same information, any
group of rational people will come to the same conclusions regarding what needs to be done.
And this is indeed what happens. The external consultants,
the internal assessment team, the senior executives -- all come to similar conclusions about what needs to be done. This also
means that people who have been involved in the process are likely to become committed to support the resulting actions --
to buy in and to take ownership.
The consensus that develops is usually focused on a
fairly small number of high-leverage issues -- say 3-6 at most. These are the 'vital few' actions that will have the most
impact on performance. It is now relatively straightforward to translate these into detailed action plans, to integrate these
into the business plan, and to assign executive responsibility for implementing these over the next year or so.
The assessment process can also be used to:
- drive continuous improvement year
after year
- 'hold the gains'.
When the assessment process has been completed
and an improvement plan developed, it is usually obvious to everyone involved that this should not be just a 'one-off' exercise.
It makes sense to repeat the process at some time in the future in order to measure how much progress has been made, and to
identify a new 'vital few'. Some high-performing organizations take this a step farther and build self assessment right into
the annual planning cycle. Used in this way, the process becomes a robust mechanism for driving continuous improvement year
after year, forever.

Malcolm Baldrige Assessment and consulting services
are available with Gartman and Associates. J. Gartman, M.Peacock and John Hopkins have all served as Baldrige Examiners
within the past 10 years and most recently in 2006.
|