BLOGRIGE

Forging Partnerships Between Unions and Schools

Posted by Pamela Wong

With all the negative press these days about the problems between public agencies and unions, I was encouraged to learn recently about what has been described as “the first-ever national summit between union leaders and administrators.”

Education Secretary Arne Duncan spoke at the event in Denver. He emphasized the importance of collaboration during these difficult economic times for school districts. “Progress more often requires tough-minded collaboration, rather than tough-minded confrontation,” he said.

The president of the National Education Association seemed to agree. “It’s about collaboration,” said Dennis Van Roekel, “about a belief that if you want to make changes for students, you need to find a way to talk to each other.”

Also giving presentations were some 12 school districts that have successfully carried out “school overhauls” that were agreed to by their teachers, administrators, and school board members.

One of those school districts was Montgomery County (Maryland) Public Schools (MCPS), a winner  of the 2010 Baldrige Award. In an online article published recently on the Web site of the American Association of School Administrators, MCPS superintendent Jerry Weast gave some insight into the district’s partnership with its unions. “We have built a trusting, respectful relationship with our employee associations, and they are at the table as we are building our budgets and making difficult decisions,” he said.

Weast said that the unions are partners in the district’s teacher evaluation system, attend Executive Leadership Team meetings, and participate in helping him develop his initial budget recommendation. He pointed out that the unions have been involved in making tough cuts. They’ve voted to give up cost of living increases for the last three years, for example.

How about union partnerships in your school districts; do you have any examples of collaboration to share?

 

 

How the Cheermudgeon Started His Birthday Celebration

Posted by Harry Hertz, the Baldrige Cheermudgeon

Yes, I am another year older (and closer to retirement). I am looking forward to celebrating my birthday with my wife and friends this weekend, which is always special and nice. And a couple of my favorite meals are planned, together with dinner at a great restaurant. I am happy! However, the day began with a phone call from the fraud unit at Master Card. Apparently they detected suspicious use of my card at a box store and a restaurant in Massachusetts. The charges weren't high, but indeed they weren't mine. My card had not been stolen, but a merchant (or employee) where I used the card had duplicated the magnetic stripe information after swiping my card. The fraud unit was unbelievably customer-focused, assuring me I would be credited for all the inappropriate charges and then offering me the names and phone numbers (to save me the trouble) of the the companies that automatically bill the credit card.

So what does this have to do with the Baldrige Criteria? Actually, let me make one more unrelated observation first and then draw it all together (in my own twisted way)! I recently read a blog posting on the CBS business network, BNET, about the three keys to thriving as a company today. The third was connecting with your customers to build true loyalty. Detecting the fraudulent use of my card was effective use of technology, data, and analysis (Category 4 addresses that), but volunteering phone numbers of companies is definitely relationship-building that goes above and beyond. While the annoyance of needing to get a new credit card is real, my credit card provider has gained my loyalty for how the situation was handled. And the person I spoke with lives in my son's town and talked with me about a sub shop where I recently charged a food purchase. Connecting with the customer! This is a wonderful example of the focus on customer engagement in Category 3 of the Criteria, Customer Focus.

Now, the other two keys to thriving: 1. you can't be pretty good at everything anymore, and 2. in an era of turmoil stick with what you believe in. Point #1 in my opinion deals squarely with strategic advantages and core competencies. These topics are central to understanding and practicing Baldrige framework principles. They are threads that are part of the systematic approach to organizational management. Sustaining an organization requires close attention to your core competencies because they will provide your strategic advantage. And building on your strategic advantages is a differentiator for ongoing success. Being pretty good at everything will not deliver ongoing success in a competitive, global marketplace.

How about sticking with what you believe in? How about sticking with Baldrige? It is not the latest management fad, that comes and goes. It is a framework that has withstood the test of time and it is a framework that evolves to always reflect the leading edge of validated management practice and the changing nature of the competitiveness landscape. It is something you can believe in and focus on for continued success.

What is your organization sticking with in these tough times?

Is Your Management Team on the Same Page?

Posted by Dawn Marie Bailey

 

A few weeks ago, I had the pleasure of talking on the phone with Baldrige alumnus Barry Johnson (thanks, Barry!) about how organizations can use the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence to achieve innovation, remain competitive, and above all sustain themselves. And when these organizations apply for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and receive actionable, meaningful feedback from our cadre of volunteer examiners, they often improve their customer focus, their workforce engagement, and above all their bottom-line results.

Barry mentioned another way that the Criteria can be used that I thought was very much worth sharing. As a series of questions and thoughtful considerations that can guide an organization on its path to performance excellence, the Criteria can also be used to help educate management teams. If senior leaders sat down to answer the questions in the Criteria's Preface: Organizational Profile, would they all come up with the same answers? Do all the senior leaders in your organization agree on how your business should run, both now and into the forseeable future?

The senior leaders of a management team can use the Organizational Profile to find out if they agree on the importance of the organization's product offerings (are they even offering the right products?), for example, or if they agree on their competitive situation, including opportunities for innovation. And a great exercise for any management team is to sit down to ensure that members agree on who are their key customers and what are those customers' expectations and requirements now and into the future.

The Preface: Organization Profile of the Criteria asks the thoughtful questions regarding an organization's vision and mission, workforce profile, assets, suppliers and partners, and much more, all in an effort to help U.S. organizations become more competitive (the mission of the Baldrige Program). And the Baldrige Program has even more tools to help those who are new to the Baldrige Criteria.

Is your management team on the same page?

The Baldrige Budget -- Just the Facts

Posted by Harry Hertz, the Baldrige Cheermudgeon

When I was growing up a regular activity in our household was to tune the television each week to Dragnet, a police show that was reprised as a movie in the late 1980's. The most memorable and debated line from the weekly show was Sergeant Friday's: "Just the facts ma'am." So let me share "just the facts" with you about the proposed budget for NIST's Baldrige program in these tough budgetary times.

The government is currently approaching the midpoint of fiscal year 2011. We are operating under a continuing resolution (CR) that allows us to spend at the prior fiscal year level. This continuing resolution expires in early March. The House of Representatives has just introduced an appropriations bill that would continue the funding for the federal government through the remainder of the fiscal year, but at lower levels government-wide than the current CR. This process is ongoing and requires agreement between the House and Senate as well as the President's signature before a new funding level is established for the rest of 2011.

This past Monday, the President submitted his budget proposal for the coming fiscal year (2012) to Congress. This budget request proposes to fund the Baldrige program at $7.7 million, a decrease of $1.9 million from our 2010 approved budget. The Administration has directed each agency to analyze its administrative costs and identify areas of savings where possible, and operating at this proposed level is consistent with this guidance.  

With the requested 2012 funding, Baldrige will continue to develop criteria, disseminate best practices and continue the award process. However, we are also beginning to evaluate alternative sources of funding and alternative cost models for the program, with our private-sector partners sharing more of the costs going forward. The Baldrige program already operates as a partnership with the private sector, consistent with the law that established the program in 1987. This budget proposal aims to expand these partnerships and to maintain and grow the program's reach and high level of service and value while exploring ways of transitioning out of federal funding. As with the fiscal year 2011 CR, the full Congress must approve the 2012 budget, followed by approval by the President.

Neither the Baldrige program's current award cycle nor its scope for the future is affected by the President's 2012 budget proposal.  These are challenging times for all, and with your help, we will rise to the occasion. 

Am I Too Old? Are They Too Young?

 Posted by Harry Hertz, the Baldrige Cheermudgeon

A new report came across my desk today, published by the IBM Center for the Business of Government. While nominally focused on government the report really focuses on the workforce in general, independent of organizational affiliation. The report gives concrete examples of why Baldrige asks how your approach to workforce engagement differs for different workforce groups or segments. In this case, IBM deals with one particular aspect of differentiation: the multi-generational workforce. While much has been written on the topic, this concise report brings many aspects into focus.

We are in a unique period in American workforce history, having four generations of workers sharing the workplace. When one realizes, among other things, the changes in technology and economic climates over these four generations, it is no wonder that the four groups have very different expectations and approaches to accomplishing work. And in this regard we are pretty capable of being stereotyped based on whether we are a Traditionalist, a Boomer, a Gen Xer, or a Millennial. I am a Boomer (and proud of it!). So I like my communications to occur through personal interaction (although e-mail is OK, because I am tech-capable, if not tech-adept), I am competitive, and I want to be led to information and thirst for knowledge. When it comes to rewarding me, I want personal attention and recognition (and team recognition is perfect). Contrast that with millennials who want to communicate by text messages and IM's, believe work should be judged just by results not hours (Boomers prided ourselves on our long work hours), and want to learn through connectivity, online, in their time and their place. And rewards should involve immediate recognition (at the speed of electrons). I could contrast all of these characteristics for Traditionalists also, but I don't have to, because they never read blogs. OK, maybe I exaggerate a little!

So what's a leader or manager to do? Recognize differences and try to be as supportive of each generation as possible. And face the challenge of having all generations work collaboratively. Now how do I conduct that four-generational meeting that suits my needs as a Boomer manager?

I don't have all the answers, but I sure know the questions to ask if I look at the Workforce Focus category of the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence. I know that Workforce Engagement (Item 5.2) is critical. I know that it involves performance management, workforce development and career progression. I also know that I need to determine the elements of engagement for each workforce group or segment. I know because the Criteria ask me about it!

I also know that a good leader needs to be sympathetic to very different styles, needs, and desires. Have you learned that lesson?

Eating Our Own Dog Food

Posted by Jeff Lucas

Let me be clear right up front that this is not a plug for 2010 Baldrige Award Recipient Nestle Purina.  Rather, it is an update on one of the ways in which the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program is using our own Criteria for Performance Excellence. 

One of the Strategic Objectives in our most recent Strategic Plan was to "Optimize the work system for performance and engagement."  A key action plan to execute this strategy was to develop capabilities around Lean Six-Sigma and begin a lean implementation.  To date we have provided introductory training for the entire staff, trained five staff members as green belts and are training one as a black belt, and conducted Rapid Improvement Events for each of our six self-directed work teams. We have had outstanding support from the Virginia MEP affiliate, Genedge, who has conducted our training and provided support for the initial RIEs.  

This past week, those of us on the Management Team, took on our process for appointing the Panel of Judges and I think we were all amazed at some of the opportunities that were staring us right in the face, but which, without the forced discipline of creating a Value Stream Map, we just never noticed or acted on.  Other teams have tackled pieces of Examiner selection, Examiner notification, Case Study development, Award Recipient profiles, and organizing Award Applicant information.

Our plan is to continue to make this an important tool, and hopefully our default way of thinking, in designing and improving our work processes.

We well know that many of our Baldrige community are Lean and/or Six-Sigma experts, and that many more of you have run across interactions with the program that probably prompted thoughts of "why do they do it like that?"  So, what would you see as key opportunities for the program as we tackle prioritizing our project selection?

Focusing on Health Care Role Models

Posted by Dawn Marie Bailey

 
With health care reform currently a hot news topic across the country, I wish there was more of a national spotlight on some of the role models of the U.S. health care industry—those organizations that are proving every day that patient care comes first and that such care can be delivered effectively. These role models certainly exist and have been honored as recipients of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, the nation's highest honor for overall performance excellence.

In 2010, Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital, an acute-care medical facility in Illinois, received such an honor by focusing on "funding the future" and demonstrating clinical outcomes in the top decile for all U.S. hospitals. For example, "Good Sam's" overall patient satisfaction exceeds top-decile ratings from Press Ganey, the largest national surveyor for patient satisfaction, for the following patient segments: outpatient, emergency, ambulatory surgery, and convenient care, as well as top-quartile performance for inpatient. In addition, measures for pneumonia, heart failure, and heart attack are equal to, approaching, or better than the top-decile level, and they meet or exceed the levels of local competitors as measured by the Healthcare Quality Association (HQA).

The Baldrige Program can help the nation focus on other U.S. health care role models that have increased patient outcomes and loyalty, physician and workforce satisfaction and engagement, charity care, and overall cost savings, among other outcomes.

Wouldn't the current health care debate be more productive if we could focus on such role models? And the marvelous thing about these Baldrige health care role models is that they share their best practices and strategies at conferences such as the Quest for Excellence and regional conferences. What would the current health care landscape look like if all providers emulated Baldrige role models? How much better would our national health care system be?

Leadership: Putting Your Money Where Your Mouth Is

Posted by Jeff Lucas

One of the Baldrige Criteria's questions that seems to be most often answered with a laundry list of activities that may or may not make a straight line connection to what the requirement is really trying to get at is:  "How do Senior Leaders' actions reflect a commitment to the organization's values?"  This weekend my wife told me about an action that her Senior Leader is taking that demonstrates a literally visceral commitment to values. 

Bill McCarthy is the Executive Director of Catholic Charities of Baltimore and is taking part in Maryland Hunger Solution's Food Stamp Challenge.  The week of January 24-31, over 80 Marylander's agreed to use the average Food Supplement benefit as their only funds for purchasing the food they would consume during the week.  As the group points out "While living on a food stamp budget for just a week cannot come close to the struggles encountered by low-income families week after week and month after month, it does provide those who take the Challenge with a new perspective and greater understanding."

McCarthy's experiences, you can read his blog here, relate how he dealt with a wide variety of what he describes as "planning and socialization" challenges associated with having to get by on only what is provided to the 643,000 Marylanders (up 22% this year) faced with the difficult choices facing those for whom food really is a basic need, rather than a lifestyle choice. These challenges included the planning side, such as making a food buying trip to that would provide the basis of his meals.  The photo above is his first dinner for the week and, while as a culinary professional I cannot justify losing the nutrients and flavor associated with peeling carrots, it looks balanced if not particularly exciting. Perhaps even more interesting, though are the "socialization" challenges that he describes.  These included rescheduling lunch meetings to eat in the office alone and figuring out how to replace the morning visit to Starbucks. 

So, agreed, Mr. McCarthy will be able to go back to a life that probably provides abundant food choices, but his actions are likely to have sent a message to his colleagues at Catholic Charities that he strongly values "educating people to social awareness and motivating them to act".  Do you have any compelling examples of how your senior leaders live out your organization's values?

Stupid Dog Tricks

 Posted by Harry Hertz, the Baldrige Cheermudgeon

OK, I am not going to write about stupid dog tricks (no offense meant to dogs), but that is what I think of whenever someone talks about stupid management fads, stupid strategies, stupid...That is also what I thought about when I read a recent blog post on Dimwitted Leadership Strategies. Furthermore, I was convinced about writing this blog post when a recent Harvard Business Review daily stat said that one of the five top words used by conscientious bloggers was "stupid." So, I am now the conscientious cheermudgeon.

First, let's set the record straight, no leader practices intentional dimwitted strategies. We all know that, but its sport to make light of events with the wisdom of 20-20 hindsight. Second, sometimes these strategies might be appropriate to the circumstances. Third, I thought I would take a look at the five dimwitted strategies in the blog post and see what the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence might help conscientious leaders consider.

#1 Command and Control. Item 1.1 is all about how senior leaders lead. Considerations include how they create a sustainable organization and how they communicate. Sustainability includes the development of future leaders and participation in organizational learning. Communication is two-way with the aim of engaging the workforce.

#2 Bottom Line Be All End All. Category 7 addresses this pretty well. It takes a balanced approach to the results that matter. It treats financial and market outcomes as the bottom line (It is the last Item.), but it places equal or greater focus on product, process, customer, workforce, and leadership outcomes. After all, they are what delivers the financial outcomes.

#3 Tradition and Prescription. The focus of this "inappropriate strategy" is being so mired in tradition and documented processes that innovation and change are stifled. The Baldrige Criteria deal with this throughout the categories. But here are a few examples. Category 2 addresses all aspects of strategic planning, including shifts in technology, customer preferences, competition, the economy, and the regulatory environment. It asks how strategic objectives address opportunities for innovation. Item 6.1 asks how you design and innovate your work systems. And Item 7.1 calls for information on accomplishment of your strategic plans.

#4 The Black Hole. The focus of this comment is major sources of waste. Category 6 asks about processes for cost control and improvement of work processes. Item 7.1 asks about your performance results for productivity, cycle time, and process effectiveness, efficiency, and innovation.

#5 The Lone Ranger. The focus of this comment is the leader who must always do everything him or herself to get it right. Item 1.1 asks how senior leaders engage the entire workforce, and focus them on action and creating value for customers and stakeholders. All of Item 5.2 focuses on workforce engagement.

No surprise, and I would never say otherwise, the Baldrige Criteria provide the framework for good management practices and should keep your organization out of the dog house! I welcome your thoughts.