performance excellence at andrews university may 31, 2001, 8:30-5:30 june 1, 2001, 8:00-noon
TRANSCRIPT
Performance Excellence at Andrews University
May 31, 2001, 8:30-5:30June 1, 2001, 8:00-Noon
Today’s Agenda
Welcome, ground rules, expectationsCore Values and the Baldrige
FrameworkThe Andrews ProfileAssessments using five Baldrige
CategoriesAcademic Quality Improvement
Project
Exercise: Core Values
Select leader, reporter, scribe, timekeeperBrainstorm elements of perfect
organization - post-its/affinityPersonal valuesReport outRead Core ValuesTeam consensus on most important/whyReport 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
LeadershipStrategic planningStudent, stakeholder and market focusInformation and analysisFaculty and staff focusProcess managementOrganizational performance results
Performance Excellence Framework
4
Information & Analysis
5
Faculty/StaffFocus
3Student/
Stakeholder,MarketFocus
7
OrganizationalPerformance
Results
7
OrganizationalPerformance
Results
2
StrategicPlanning
1
Leadership
6
ProcessManagement
Organizational Profile:
Environment, Relationships,
Challenges
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 energyStudent, stakeholder, faculty, staff
benefitTie-in with accreditationCan 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 appliedApproach is consistently used by
appropriate areas Think “most, many, some, few”
Results
Outcomes - beyond anecdotesCurrent performancePerformance relative to comparisonsRate and breadthLinkage to key:
student/stakeholder/market requirements organizational challenges processes
Exercise: The Andrews Profile
Table teams10 minutes per flipchartScribe responsesDiscussion
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 3Process for educational programsDetermining student needs/expectationsUsing information from current, former,
future studentsImproving listening and learning
methodsStakeholder needs/expectationsImproving listening and learning
methods
Assessment of Category 3
Process for building relationshipsContact requirements for
students/stakeholdersKey measures/indicatorsAccess mechanismsComplaint management processImproving relationships
Assessment of Category 3
Determining student and stakeholder satisfaction
Follow-up on interactionsComparing satisfactionImproving 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 processConcentrate on the academic
enterprise, involve faculty more directlyProvide 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” approachRecognize 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
InterestExploration
ComprehensiveSelf-Assessment
StrategyForum
+
System Review
All partnering institutionswill also update AQIP with
an Annual Results Inventory
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
CollaborationAlignment with state, national
programsExclusively higher education focusInstitutional support services
Today’s Agenda
Report Out, Categories 5 and 6Assessment, Categories 4 and 7Review of Key Strengths and
Opportunities for ImprovementQ 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 involvementTo learn and evolve
What Does It Take?
A focus on processA focus on information and analysisA focus on evaluation and
improvementA focus on resultsA focus on peopleA 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