The purpose of this digital version is to make the EFQM Excellence Model widely and conveniently accessible to the public for personal, educational and. Business Excellence Matrix User Guide – EFQM Model Version User Guide – EFQM Model Version For the past twenty years we have shared what. EFQM Excellence Model Free Download. Thanks to the EFQM Excellence Model Sponsors, the full content is now available for free download in.
|Language:||English, Spanish, French|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Sign up for free]|
document provides an overview; the full version of the Model is available from our webshop. The EFQM Excellence Model The EFQM Excellence Model. EFQM Excellence Model Matt Fisher Representing the EFQM Assessor Community: Representing EFQM Private Sector Members. ISSN: Uygur & Sümerli (). EFQM Excellence Model. AKYAY UYGUR. Assistant Professor Gazi University Tourism Faculty. Golbası- Ankara.
Both these issues are still important; they are still included in the titles of the 9 criteria. The concepts that they belong to have been expanded though to incorporate the feedback received. The focus of this concept is now on organisational development and ensuring they have the capacity and capability to achieve their strategic goals.
Change needs to be managed effectively to deliver the desired benefits. The process framework adopted needs to be flexible enough to enable the organisation to deliver the changes required, with appropriate speed.
Ultimately, excellent organisations are recognised for their ability to proactively anticipate and lead change, rather than just reacting to the actions of others. As with the updates, the bullet points from the Fundamental Concepts have been integrated into the criteria, forming the basis for the guidance points of the framework.
The change to Business Results is accompanied by the definition of the Business Stakeholders e. Previously we had avoided the use of business in the Model as feedback from the public sector was that this was too private sector focused. However, the feedback we received during the consultation process was that budget pressure on the public sector was leading to a more commercial attitude and that this change would be understood.
There are no other changes to Criterion Titles or Criterion Part Titles Changes are restricted to the guidance points, aligned to the new concepts and using simplified language.
There are 5 Enablers on the left hand side and 4 Results on the right. There are lines between the boxes as the criteria cannot be viewed in isolation; each influences the others. At its simplest, the Model can be viewed as a cause and effect diagram. You do something in the Enablers side and measure the impact on the results side.
Based on the impact, you learn, get creative, innovate and do something else different. For example, if we look at the criterion part for 1a, we can see there are fewer guidance points. The language has also been simplied. The Model remains a non-prescriptive framework; we are describing here what we would expect to see in an excellent organisation. We are not trying to describe HOW they achieve it. The results all have a similar definition, focused on the relevant stakeholder group for each criterion.
In fact, current study aims to contribute to this extant area of literature through scrutinizing and validating the results of INPHE relying on the evaluation results of an internationally-known quality management system QMS i. Since the country has also started to review and replace current evaluation system, the results could serve as invaluable practical implication for such a purpose. Methods Conducted in the second half of , the study investigated all EDs located in the hospitals with more than beds affiliated with TUMS, as they had a well-developed ED.
They were chosen because in these hospitals, more than 30 emergency beds existed. The latter is the subject of this study, as the researchers thought the performance of departments were under their own control and valid to measure.
The evaluation process of INPHE comprises a pre-arranged announced site visit by a multidisciplinary team of surveyors. The evaluation usually takes no more than one week depending on the size of hospitals and the number of in-patient beds. At the end of the site visit, the surveyors are expected to hold a meeting with managers of the hospital to discuss the problems and to brief them on existing non-compliances with pre-announced standards. The result of the assessment is usually sent to the hospitals within a month of the visit and, if any ED is non-compliant, namely achieving grade 4, it is given six months to improve its deficiencies and solve its identified problems.
Indicate who the owner of the approach is. It is better to be cautious; only go for a higher rating if there is consensus, based on the evidence.
You can also capture ideas for further improvement and give something a maximum rating. This demonstrates continuous learning and improvement. This captures the information an Assessor Team would need to prepare a site visit. This does not include all the data from the input sheet.
The Enabler Map can either be produced directly from the Excel file or transferred to Word or another application. This would be the documentation you would use, and the assessors should ask for, to gain a fuller understanding the approach. There are sheets at the end of the file to input data for the 4 results criteria. There are a total of 12 measures. These should be split to show 6 measures for each of the results sub-criteria, as indicated in the table.
We have provided space for the actual result achieved, the target and a relevant benchmark. More lines can be added to these 4 sheets without affecting the tool. You can populate the results area with relevant results either before completing the Enablers section or afterwards. The score is limited to points as the full EFQM criteria are not being used in this process.
These would be the recurring themes that come up during the assessment. This should be based on functional responsibility. If the improvements have been aligned to the strategic objectives, this would normally be a member of the management team or one of their direct reports. The owner is then responsible for establishing a team to develop and implement the improvement plan. The Matrix can be incorporated as part of the business planning process to check that the proposed action plans are aligned to the overall strategy of the organisation and address the issues identified.
Agreed improvement can be included in the annual plans and, where appropriate, the annual objectives of the relevant people.
Progress against the improvement plans should be reviewed by the owner. Reviewing the self- assessment then becomes an annual exercise, as part of the annual planning process.
This means you can use the same tool for self-assessment and external recognition through these levels, avoiding duplication and simplifying the process. Leaders engage with customers, partners and representatives of society 1d. Leaders ensure that the organisation is flexible and manages change effectively Strategy is based on understanding the needs and expectations of both stakeholders and the 2a. Strategy is based on understanding internal performance and capabilities Strategy and supporting policies are developed, reviewed and updated to ensure economic, 2c.
People plans support the organisation's strategy 3b. People's knowledge and abilities are developed 3c. People are aligned, involved and empowered 3d. People communicate effectively throughout the organisation 3e.
People are rewarded, recognised and cared for 4a.