Transcript The Show-Me Challenge SEMO, 9-9-98

Performance Excellence at
Andrews University
May 31, 2001, 8:30-5:30
June 1, 2001, 8:00-Noon
Today’s Agenda
Welcome, ground rules, expectations
Core Values and the Baldrige Framework
The Andrews Profile
Assessments using five Baldrige
Categories
Academic Quality Improvement Project
Exercise: Core Values
Select leader, reporter, scribe, timekeeper
Brainstorm elements of perfect
organization - post-its/affinity
Personal values
Report out
Read Core Values
Team consensus on most important/why
Report out
Core Values
 Visionary leadership
 Learning-centered education
 Organizational and personal learning
 Valuing faculty, staff and partners
 Agility
 Focus on the future
 Managing for innovation
 Management by fact
 Public responsibility and citizenship
 Focus on results and creating value
 Systems perspective
The Seven Categories
Leadership
Strategic planning
Student, stakeholder and market focus
Information and analysis
Faculty and staff focus
Process management
Organizational performance results
Performance Excellence
Framework
Why Focus on Performance
Excellence?
Understand performance, guide planning
and learning opportunities
Improve organizational, department/unit
and personal performance practices,
capabilities and results
Deliver ever-improving value to students
and stakeholders
Communicate internally and externally
What Are the Benefits?
Organizational, department, personal
improvement
Organizational focus and energy
Student, stakeholder, faculty, staff benefit
Tie-in with accreditation
Can do attitude
A strategic advantage
Approach
How? Method(s) established?
Appropriate?
Effectiveness and degree
Repeatable, integrated, consistently applied
Improvement cycles
Based on reliable information and data
Aligned with organizational needs
Beneficial innovation and change
Deployment
Extent of approach applied
Approach is consistently used by
appropriate areas
Think “most, many, some, few”
Results
Outcomes - beyond anecdotes
Current performance
Performance relative to comparisons
Rate and breadth
Linkage to key:
student/stakeholder/market requirements
organizational challenges
processes
Exercise: The Andrews
Profile
Table teams
10 minutes per flipchart
Scribe responses
Discussion
Format of Self-Assessment
Student/Stakeholder/Market Focus
Category - entire group
Other Categories
Individually read elements
Select team roles
Identify strengths and opportunities for
improvement
Report out (identify elements, “how,” “why”)
Getting to the vital few
Assessment of Category 3
Process for educational programs
Determining student needs/expectations
Using information from current, former,
future students
Improving listening and learning methods
Stakeholder needs/expectations
Improving listening and learning methods
Assessment of Category 3
Process for building relationships
Contact requirements for
students/stakeholders
Key measures/indicators
Access mechanisms
Complaint management process
Improving relationships
Assessment of Category 3
Determining student and stakeholder
satisfaction
Follow-up on interactions
Comparing satisfaction
Improving satisfaction determination
approaches
Assessment of
Categories 1 and 2
Leadership (Category 1)
Teams 1 and 2
Strategic Planning (Category 2)
Teams 3 and 4
Assessment of
Categories 5 and 6
Faculty and Staff Focus (Category 5)
Teams 1 and 3
Process Management (Category 6)
Teams 2 and 4
HLC’s AQIP
Forces for change
Management
Failure prevention and success
Accountability
Information and knowledge
Competition
Partnerships and collaboration
Short response cycles
Continuous improvement view
HLC’s AQIP: Philosophy
Voluntary, alternative process
Concentrate on the academic enterprise,
involve faculty more directly
Provide concrete feedback to enable
institutions to reach higher performance
levels
Reduce intrusiveness, cost, slower cycles
of improvement
HLC’s AQIP: Philosophy
Replace “one-size fits all” approach
Recognize and celebrate institutional
distinctiveness and outstanding
achievements
Supply public with more understandable,
useful information concerning the quality
and value of accredited colleges and
universities
HLC’s AQIP: Criteria
HLC’s AQIP: Process
Interest
Exploration
Strategy
Forum
All partnering institutions
will also update AQIP with
an Annual Results Inventory
+
Comprehensive
Self-Assessment
System
Review
HLC’s AQIP: Distinctions
Performance improvement
Nine criteria
Processes, outcomes, value added
Separate criteria for various work
processes
Results in each criterion
Ongoing cycle based on feedback
HLC’s AQIP: Distinctions
Collaboration
Alignment with state, national
programs
Exclusively higher education focus
Institutional support services
Today’s Agenda
Report Out, Categories 5 and 6
Assessment, Categories 4 and 7
Review of Key Strengths and
Opportunities for Improvement
Q and A, Discussion
Assessment of
Categories 4 and 7
Information and Analysis (Category 4)
Teams 1 and 4
Organizational Performance Results
(Category 7)
Teams 2 and 3
Self-Assessment Themes
Key Strengths
Key Opportunities for Improvement
Why Focus on Performance
Excellence?
To manage performance, planning,
training and assessment
For diagnostic purposes - systems
approach to learning and improvement via
established set of criteria
To foster broad involvement
To learn and evolve
What Does It Take?
A
A
A
A
A
A
focus on process
focus on information and analysis
focus on evaluation and improvement
focus on results
focus on people
long-term commitment
Some Assumptions
Assumption 1: Two viewpoints
“Accountability?*&^%$”
Can’t measure, they make us do it, it takes extra
time, it’s an add-on, it will pass
“Let’s keep improving!”
We can measure, we should do this for our
students and stakeholders, this is already part of
what we do
Assumption 2: This takes commitment,
alignment, integration and time
Some Assumptions
Assumption 3: Change via change agents,
planned training and education,
recognition
Assumption 4: Focus on the entire
university through faculty/staff
Assumption 5: Simplify - mission driven
Assumption 6: It’s a culture
Final Questions
Most important thing learned?
What questions still remain?
Next steps?
The vital few
 Action plans