EFQM Model. Evolution of EFQM in DCD

Implementation of EFQM Excellence Model in Housing Department 9 November 2012 Ir Dr Mckey Ho DCD Management Model EFQM Model We started with the 2...
Author: Benedict Carr
1 downloads 0 Views 9MB Size
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