Baldrige Criteria for its internal Business Excellence Model - The Baldrige Dance

L

lmfoong

#1
Borrow from Marc's "Baldrige Dance", I am seeking for forum partner on this topic.
I worked in an organization in Malaysia who has modelled Baldrige Criteria for its internal Business Excellence Model for the last 4 years. So far, 22 companies has completed a baseline assessment. They scored range from 50 - 550 points. To kick start, I have the following questions :-

1) During the baseline assessment, we spend much time interview assessee for most companies. These companies ended with less than 250 points. Is this the right approach ?

2) What approach should be taken to assess these companies (0-250 points)during their second assessment ?

3) What different approach is needed to conduct a second assessment for company who has attained 350-550 points in the last internal assessment ?


------------------
Thanks and Best Regards

lmfoong

[This message has been edited by lmfoong (edited 12 September 2000).]
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration
Staff member
Admin
#2
I do hope you get a response on this. Unfortunately I haven't seen much activity in the Baldrige forums.
 
R

Roger Eastin

#3
Unfortunately, it seems that so much attention is being given to ISO standards that areas such as Baldridge award and TPM initiatives are being swept under the rug. It's too bad because these two initiatives alone can add a lot of value to a company's operations.
 
A

Andy Bassett

#4
I have participated as an award assessor for the EQA a couple of times, which is similar to Baldridge, but i dont think i understand full your questions, maybe you can clarify.
-------------------------------------------
Qu 1) During the baseline assessment, we spend much time interview assessee for most companies. These companies ended with less than 250 points. Is this the right approach ?
-------------------------------------------
The beauty of the Business Excellence Model is that you can assess it absolutely as you wish, ie by yourself or using a third party external to the company. Whoever carries out the assessment has a range of different ways to do this (6 i think at the last count) How exactly are you doing it?

------------------------------------------
Qu 2) What approach should be taken to assess these companies (0-250 points)during their second assessment ?
------------------------------------------

I cant honestly think of any reason to change the approach for a second assessment. Maybe for the first time the company will use an external person to assist them through the process using for example the comparatively simply questionnaire method, and the second time they maybe sufficiently experience to do it themselves using a matrix approach.

--------------------------------------------
3) What different approach is needed to conduct a second assessment for company who has attained 350-550 points in the last internal assessment ?
--------------------------------------------

Again i cant think of any reason to change the assessment method becuase of the scores the company has got.

Not much help i know, maybe you could give a little more info.

Regards




------------------
Andy B
 
L

lmfoong

#5
Andy B,
I guess to get specific response, I have to give more information about the assessment.
Essentially, there are carried out in two stages, namely :-
Stage 1 :
A desktop assessment will be carried out based on a written report about how a company addresses the Baldrige criteria requirements. Then assessor will allocate a score using Baldrige scoring system as a guide. ( Baldrige assessor do not conduct on-site assessment if the desktop score is low, I guess if it is less than 550 point)
Stage 2 :
After the desktop assessment, an on-site assessment will be conducted in the applicant company. Method used will include interview with process owner, varify and clarify items stated in the write-up and witness its deployment.

Our experience is that a 0-250 company would have a poor write-up and does not practice most of the items required by the criteria. This write-up normally does not address the criteria clearly. As such, we need to do quite a bit of clarification and verification through interview sessions. And normally, there is no need to witness any deployment.

On the other hand, a 250-350 company is likely to have a reasonable write-up and addresses many of the criterai requirement. They likely also indicated deployment in the roganization. However, we still need to do quite a bit of clarification and verification through interview sessions. Also we will spend some time to witness deployment.

In the case of above 550 companies ( we had two so far ), their write-up is not as good as expected. As such, we still need to do quite a bit of clarification and verification through interview sessions. But these two companies deploy much better than indicated in the write-up. The issue is how to see the difference in their deployment in terms of integration, alignment etc as required by the scoring system.

So, come back to my 3 questions; The scoring guidelines for above 550 points company is more strigent than a 350-550 company and 0-250 company. Based on this, I seek to explore experience from the forum group.



------------------
Thanks and Best Regards

lmfoong
 
A

Andy Bassett

#6
Hello Imfoong

Thanks for the clarification. You raise some interesting points. For information the EFQM (The organisation administering the European Quality Award in Brussels), uses a similar system;

(Just for info, over 10,000 people are using the Business Excellence Model in Europe to do 'Self-Assessment' but only about 100 apply for a award)

The EFQM gathers together Award Applications (Written documents that totals about 75 pages), these are then forwarded to Teams of about 4-5 trained assessors. These assessors then assess and score the applicants and give the results back to the EFQM.

The EFQM then decides who will get a 'Site Visit'. I dont know the criteria for this decision, but i suspect that they also use the 500-550 mark. The company is then duly visited 'on-site' by the Award Assessors where the truth of their application is verified (Im not sure if the EFQM would put it quite so simply).

Interestingly, as far as i know, any award applicant can request a site visit, irresepctive of their score, and as long as they are prepared to pay for it they will get one.

Having said all that i can see a certain amount of logic in what you are saying.

A low scoring company is likely to be having problems in understanding the model and writing the assessment. A 'desktop' assessment would be enough for these companies. A high scoring company is unlikley to have any problem understanding the model, but the truth of what they are saying needs to be verified in a site visit, additionally a more in-depth view of such a company is necessary to define any 'Points for Improvement' or 'Strengths'.

Regards



------------------
Andy B
 
U

Unregistered

#7
Why is Baldrige getting less attention?

I agree that Baldrige has much to offer, but may be too difficult and costly for some organization to initiate. Although some believe Baldrige is being swept aside, what other standards focus on strategy, planning, and leadership? It is becoming increasingly evident that strong strategy, planning and leadership may provide organizations with the best chance at differentiation and/or competitive advantage.

Any thoughts?

Diane
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration
Staff member
Admin
#8
I think its the difference between being required to do something and wanting to do something. Those who pursue the Baldrige - whether to 'comply' to or to actually apply for it - are those in which upper management sees it for its merits - which, as you point out, are important (at least in my opinion). Strategy, planning, and leadership - long term, not a 'quickie' like so many 'fixes' companies seek.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Correspondence Baldrige criteria and 9001 processes Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
Wes Bucey Hospital Turns Down Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award World News 0
J ISO 9001 vs. AS 9100 vs. Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
M Differences between ISO 9004:2000, Baldrige National Quality Progr ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
G Malcolm Baldrige Award Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 6
F Definition Malcom Baldrige NQA Vs European's EFQM Model Definitions, Acronyms, Abbreviations and Interpretations Listed Alphabetically 4
M Information of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 4
O How Many Companies Pursue the Baldrige Award? Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 8
M Qualifications - Board of Examiners Baldrige Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
R Malcolm Baldrige award for "Not For Profits" World News 0
Marc BALDRIGE, SIX SIGMA, & ISO: Understanding Your Options Six Sigma 0
D European Model for Quality Excellence vs. ISO Guide 62 vs. MBNQA (Baldrige) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 14
B EFQM Business Excellence Model vs. The Malcolm Baldrige Award Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
J Malcome Baldrige and the EOQ Award Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 4
E The next step? VDA 6.1 to EFQM - Same basic principle as the Baldrige VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 10
R EFQM Business Excellence Model vs. ISO 9001 vs. Baldrige Award Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 3
O Baldrige Award Procedure - What are the primarily parameters they use to evaluate? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
Marc Baldrige and ERP and Project management Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 3
Marc Baldrige Winners - 1999 Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 5
B Baldrige replacing ISO 9001? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 11
B GM GP-12 Exit Criteria - Additional Safe Launch Inspection - (Also see GM1927-28 ) Customer and Company Specific Requirements 2
B AS9100 8.4.1 Supplier Selection/Evaluation criteria and reevaluations AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
I Mother bobbin final inspection criteria Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
R Procedure, Frequency and Acceptance Criteria for Replicate, Recalibration, Before-After and Intermediate Checks ISO 17025 related Discussions 8
P Design FMEA - Detection Rating criteria ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 3
J Criteria Matrix To Initiate An A3 or 8D ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
qualprod Best criteria to measure Corrective Action effectiveness - Poor Maintenance ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
B ASTM F2924-14 /ASTM F3001 - Room temperature classification criteria Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
M Supplier selection criteria - Medical devices ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
qualprod Criteria to raise a Nonconformance based on KPI values ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 39
M Criteria and when to carry out Setup Approval Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
V What is the criteria to cite an good documentation practices observation as an data integrity related issue US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 6
S Acceptance criteria for gauges General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 6
M Characterization Testing - NO acceptance criteria, no minimum performance requirement Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
J AIAG PPAP: 2.2.11.3 Acceptance Criteria for Initial Study (page 9, 4th edition) APQP and PPAP 1
C FDA on changing acceptance criteria re: analytical method validation US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 1
Z UDI assignment Criteria Software IVDR Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
Ashok sunder What are the criteria for setting a target KPI value against a quality objective? Benchmarking 7
qualprod Criteria for print shop - How do you consider the cycle time in a print shop? Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 21
eule del ayre IATF 16949 / ISO 9001:2015 audit criteria IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 17
GStough Auditing Against Criteria Unfamiliar to Auditee - Yea or Nay? General Auditing Discussions 11
M Internal Audit Assessment Criteria - ISO 13485:2016 Internal Auditing 21
S Agreement for allowance for visual criteria after submission APQP and PPAP 1
V Process and Internal Audit Criteria matrix wanted Internal Auditing 8
I Writing a Cosmetic Criteria for Switches Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 1
M Example ISO 14971 policy and risk criteria ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 0
D How to set equipment calibration/verification criteria General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 1
A Operating criteria for production processes - ISO 14001 Cl. 8.1 ISO 14001:2015 Specific Discussions 3
B The most important criteria of IEC 60601-1 medical devices safety IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
P Supplier (Vendor) Evaluation Criteria - IATF 16949 Cl. 8.4.1.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1

Similar threads

Top Bottom