Implementation of EFQM Excellence Model in Housing Department 9 November 2012 Ir Dr Mckey Ho
DCD Management Model
EFQM Model
We started with the 2003 EFQM model in 2008.
Evolution of EFQM in DCD • 2008 – Introduction of EFQM ExModel in Development & Construction Division (DCD)
• 2009 – RESULTS Æ ENABLERS (Reverse approach)
• 2010 – ENABLERS Æ RESULTS (Traditional approach)
• 2011 – Participated in APBEST Award based on EFQM Excellence Model criteria
• 2012 ... – What’s next ?
Why EFQM ExModel?
The State of Quality in the UK • 30% org. adopting early quality philosophies (TQM, zero-defects, integrated systems)
• 23% org. using other tool based approaches (QC, problem solving, risk-based approach)
• 22% org. based on recent quality philosophies (six-sigma, lean sigma)
• 12% org. using self-assessment auditing tools (EFQM model) • All the above categories encompass a variety of initiatives, including the running of international standard ISO 9001 in parallel Source: Quality World (October 2007)
Connections between ISO 9001:2008 and EFQM Model
QC
vs.
QA
vs.
TQM & EFQM Model
A Simple Reason
不 進 則 退
Evolution of quality management in DCD
The Approaches
Approaches Approach
Typical process
Advantage
Disadvantage
1.
Award simulation
Using a team of trained assessors drawn from the whole organization using the written report approach.
High accuracy
More time and resources required
2.
Peer involvement
Similar to the award simulation but with the trained assessors drawn from a business unit.
High accuracy
Difficult in getting the right people
3.
Workshop
A management-led approach with data and evidence gathered during the workshop.
Shorten time-scale for data collection
Less accurate
4.
Matrix chart
Use of an organization-specific achievement matrix based on the EFQM Model on a point scale of 1 to 10 or similar.
Quick & simple
Over-simplified, low accuracy
5.
Questionnaire
Questionnaire based on EFQM Model criteria for scoring.
A good method for getting widespread feedback
Very dependent on the skill in drawing up the questionnaire
6.
Hybrid or others
…
Which approach? Award simulation model is recommended for mature organizations with a higher invested effort. For organizations at the beginning of the excellence journey, less complex designs of the questionnaire and matrix chart approaches with a lower effort are suggested .
The Matrix Chart Approach
… The Matrix Chart Approach
… The Matrix Chart Approach
… The Matrix Chart Approach
… The Matrix Chart Approach
Synopsis of differences between “AwardLike” assessments and “Diagnosis SelfAssessment”
Figures that matter
Case study – Use of EFQM Model (Survey findings in the UK)
Resource used: A – 15%; B – 3%; C – 30%; D – 6% of the organization staff involved in selfassessment and improvement teams. Most effective implementation of the EFQM Model: Case D
ext …...
Training for the EFQM ExModel • 20 senior management board members received 1-day EFQM briefing • 40 professional, technical & site staff received 2-day EFQM internal assessor training • 7 professional staff received 3-day European Excellence Assessor training • Over 4% of works staff in DCD been trained • Visited two EFQM applied organizations in the UK: London Probation Office, CIMA HQ
Diagnostic self assessment Enablers Å Results
RESULTS Æ ENABLERS Enablers
Results
COST
TIME
RESULTS Æ ENABLERS RESOURCE • 1 team on TIME • 1 team on COST • Each team – 1 Chief + 20 members • 20 members Æ 3 sub-teams • Each sub-team study 3 projects (recently completed)
• 1 project – good result • 1 project – just met target • 1 project – poor result • Took 4 months
RESULTS Æ ENABLERS 1. Aspect – critical issues affecting RESULT 2. Strength (+1 to +5) / AFI (-1 to -5) 3. Related EFQM ENABLER (criteria) 4. Proposed APPROACH 5. Proposed DEPLOYMENT 6. Proposed ASSESSMENT & REVIEW
Award-Like self assessment Enablers Æ Results
C1
C3
C7
C2
C6
C4
C5
C8
C9
Enablers Æ Results • Full scale self assessment for the 32 EFQM subcriteria RESOURCE • 1 Facilitator • 40 assessors in 5 groups • Each group led by a EEA • Half-day session per week • Total 20 weeks A 120 pages self assessment document was prepared
Preparation before start
RESULTS Measurement CUSTOMER Results • Perceptions: customer survey • Performance Indicators: quality, reliability PEOPLE Results • Perceptions: staff survey • Performance Indicators: people turnover, no. of training days, no. of sick leave, no. of grievance cases. SOCIETY Results • Perceptions: society survey, external recognition • Performance Indicators: environmental performance, no. of community engagement activities, safety performance KEY Results • Key Strategic Outcomes: Financial, Performance vs Budget, Effectiveness of Output. • Key Performance Indicators: Balanced Scorecard (financial, customer, internal business process, learning & growth), Project Management Performance (time, cost, quality), Reliability
Results-Strategy/Process Link • Performance focus Æ RADAR, W-H approach, KPIs. • Customer Focus Æ ISO 9001, 6Ω, innovation. • People Focus Æ 5S, OHSAS 18001, Investor in People (IiP). • Society Focus Æ ISO 26000, ISO 14001, ISO 50001, community engagement.
Strategy-Process Link (policy delivery) • Multi-dimensional matrix • Level analysis
C-1: Leadership Motivation & Encouragement • The Caring & Collaborative Culture Business Partners Stakeholders
• Staff Support and Recognition • Visible Involvement Seminars/Talks at National/Int’l Arena Seminars/Talks at Local Arena
C-2: Strategy Customer, Quality & Safety • •
Vision, Mission, Guiding Principles and 4C Values Balancing Social, Economical & Environmental Needs
•
Site Safety Strategy 3-pronge approach
•
Business Plan Deployment Regular updating and improve
•
Strategy Communication
C-3: People Management Professionalism & Commitment Work-Life-Balance Staff Engagement
• •
Tea gathering, grade management focus group meetings, works group consultative committee, …
People-oriented goal
•
Job rotation, career development, employability skills enhancement, mutual respect & creativity
Performance Management & Development System (PMDS) Buddy Scheme, Staff Incentive Scheme, Extra Mile Award, Appreciation Letter, Caring@work training programme, … Empowerment
• • •
People that Matter Tea gatherings Grade management focus group meetings
Works Group Consultative
Committee (meets at quarterly intervals) Buddy Scheme z z
New recruits Newly cross-posted staff from other divisions
Staff Incentive Scheme z z z
Professional
Project award (Grand award) Team award Individual staff award
Extra Mile Award z z
Technical
Team award Individual staff award
We give letters of appreciation to staff. We consult and engage staff if we launch new procurement mode and new systems. …………. . . . .
.
.
.
.
Site Admin & Support
C-4: Partnership & Resources Win-Win & Prudence •
Procurement System
• • •
Project Partnering Disputes Resolution Advisor System ICT
•
Risk Management List Management Performance Assessment Scoring System (PASS)
PDA, Project e-Collaboration System, KM Portal, RFID, GIS, Building Information Modeling (BIM), Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system, ….
Resource Sharing
C-5: Processes, Products & Services
Quality & Innovation • • • •
• • •
ISO 9001 for quality management ISO 14001 for environmental management ISO 50001 for energy management PASS as a performance management and training tool for main contractors, subcontractors, and workers Product certification for materials quality assurance 3-Pronge approach for health and safety Distributed R&D for process, technology and material innovation.
C-6: Customer Results Quality-home & Green-living •
Perceptions Customer Satisfaction Index (through Survey) External Appreciation & Recognition
•
Performance Indicators No. of Defects per Completed Flat No. of Complaints per 1000 Flats
C-7: People Results Talent & Satisfaction •
Perceptions Staff Barometer Survey
•
Performance Indicators
No. No. No. No.
of of of of
Sick Leave taken per year Grievance Cases per year Disciplinary Cases per year Training Days per staff per year
People Results 1. Attitude at work 2. Workplace culture 3. Workplace environment 4. Training & development 5. Teamwork & involvement 6. Communication 7. Management effectiveness 8. Leadership
No. of training days per staff per year DCD average
z
= 32 hours
Private sector average
z
= 17.8 hours
7 N o . o f tra in in g d a y s p e r sta ff
Staff barometer survey
6 Target
5
Prof
4 3
Tech
2 Site
1 0 2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
C-8: Society Results Caring and Harmony • Perceptions HKQAA-HSBC CSR Index
• Performance Indicators Site Safety Performance Securing Wages Payment to Workers Energy Savings in Buildings
C-9: Key Results
Sustainable, Customer, Cost-effective, Stakeholder-value
•
Key Strategic Outcomes
•
Construction Cost Budget vs Expenditure Volume of Public Housing Production Average Waiting Time for Eligible Public Housing Applications
Key Performance Indicators Time - Project Slippage Cost - Cost Variation Quality - Defects per Flat
Self Assessment - Scoring
DCD-EFQM-Self Assessment Overall Score Summary
Typical Excellence Journey – Level of Excellence
DCD’s Excellence Journey will Continue Certification to ISO 50001
2012 Established the ISO 31000 risk management system framework Verified to HKQAA-HSBC CSR Index in accordance with ISO 26000 criteria
2011
2010
DCD awarded the APBEST (EFQM) Grand Award
2009 Certified to ISO 14001:2004 Certified to ISO 9001:2000
1995 Certified to ISO 9001:1987
1992
Certified to ISO 9001:2008
2003 Certified to ISO 9001:1994
1993 Established the ISO 9001:1987 QMS
1990 Implementation of Performance Assessment Scoring System (PASS)
Thank You