The EFQM model – the self-assessment tool
It is a happy undergraduate, majoring in management, who draws this topic at the state exam. Is there anyone who does not know the self-assessment role of the model?
„One of the basic issues of any improvement – but especially that of management and organisation improvement – is that what the objective and subject of the improvement should be – since these activities on the one hand are time and money consuming and on the other hand they have ambiguous outcomes. Namely, the organisation has to make a decision which activity, process or organisational unit they should spend their slender resources on. The model, and the self-assessment implemented in accordance with it, provides a concrete aid with the reply to the basic issue.
"You should measure irrespectively to any application..." [1] write Pál Bodor and Endre Hercz in the guide published by the Quality Improvement Centre in 2001.
Well, it is worth thinking about this last sentence fragment. The beginning of the quotation is trivial, but the "irrespectively of the application..." phrase refers to the domestic practice that nowadays self-assessment is almost equivalent to an application. Being an assessor at the site visit of the Regional Quality Award, when I asked about the tool of self-assessment I was usually told that the application was that tool. This means that they compile the submission document, communicate it to the people and finally they ‘suffer’ the site visit. And when studying the feedback they draw the conclusion that the assessor either did not understand the point or he/she was partial. Only the main point is neglected; “looking into the mirror”, the identification of areas for improvement. Even if the events go on like this, then the process still has a great benefit; the areas for improvement identified by the assessor, and the development of the improvement plans related to the areas. The only flaw in the process is that it is not a self-assessment in the strict sense. Although, it is not a problem, because the main point of the EFQM model is continuous improvement, and the above mentioned process should be the input – in case of well prepared assessors.
The crisis management tool
At the beginning of the deployment of the ISO standard family it was a common belief that only stable organisations should start to deploy the standard. Well, I would not like to start an argument with those who have this opinion, neither with those plenty ones who consider the TQM to be a “touch-me-not”. Most of my noted consultant friends believe that „if the organisation is in the midst of other, more complex improvement actions (reorganisation, implementation of new production technology, administration software or quality management system, privatisation, etc.), it is worth thinking over when and how it is possible to align the tasks". [1] There is grave truth in this sentence. What kind of words does it contain; think over, align, so they are not forbidden, impossible or inadequate!What did Schumacher’s Ferrari and Mr Smith’s Trabant Hycomat have in common? Both of them are cars. But just think it over; what would have happened if Schumi had started off with the Hycomat and Mr Smith had tried to get to the Medical Centre with the Ferrari? Of course this example is just a joke, since everyone knows what both cars are used for.
But has anyone even thought that the EFQM model is nothing else but a check list? Just imagine that a manager is assigned to establish a new company and the following items are given
While the operation conditions (privatization, competitors, operation rules and mainly its organisation) are changing and its people or even its leaders might change, too! What is the EFQM model good for in this situation?
