【正文】 (10 minutes individual study, 10 minutes team study, 5 minute presentation) (10分鐘個(gè)人研究 、 10分鐘小組討論 、 5分鐘小組陳述 ) 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 40 Preparing the Assessment Team Step 4 評(píng)估組準(zhǔn)備 The Sequences and Process Flow順序和流程圖 Assembling the Team and Assign Responsibilities 召集小組并分配職責(zé) Team Training (similar to this course but using internal available documents such as: organizational profile, business review reports, etc.) 小組培訓(xùn) （ 與本課程類(lèi)似 ， 但是使用內(nèi)部文件例如：組織 簡(jiǎn)介 、 經(jīng)營(yíng)評(píng)審報(bào)告等 。 Presentation and Consensus: The organizational profile is the ―internal‖ criteria for assessment. It tells what is relevant and important to your organization and its performance. Do not proceed the assessment without the consensus of the senior leaders. 陳述和認(rèn)同：組織簡(jiǎn)介是評(píng)估的 “ 內(nèi)部標(biāo)準(zhǔn) ” 。 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 33 Participants參與者 (2) ? Assessment Team Leader評(píng)估組領(lǐng)導(dǎo) : – Responsible for the planning and execution of the assessment 負(fù)責(zé)評(píng)估的策劃和執(zhí)行 – Coordinate with external expert 與外部專(zhuān)家協(xié)調(diào) – Coaching ant training assessment team members 培訓(xùn)評(píng)估組成員 – Focal point for activities 各項(xiàng)活動(dòng)的匯集點(diǎn) ? Category Leader大類(lèi)領(lǐng)導(dǎo) : – A member of the assessment team with expertise in certain Category(ies) 對(duì)某一類(lèi)有專(zhuān)業(yè)技術(shù)的評(píng)估組成員 – Consolidate the findings in the Category總結(jié)每一類(lèi)的發(fā)現(xiàn) ? Assessment Team Member評(píng)估組成員 : – Take part in training, data gathering, document findings, presenting the assessment report, planning for improvement. 參加培訓(xùn) 、 數(shù)據(jù)收集 、 記錄結(jié)果 、 陳述評(píng)估報(bào)告 、 策劃改進(jìn) 。 你可以在自己需求的基礎(chǔ)上簡(jiǎn)化標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 。 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 28 Planning for SelfAssessment – Step 1 Initiations 啟動(dòng) Boundaries 范圍 Criteria 標(biāo)準(zhǔn) Type of Assessment (refer to ) 評(píng)估類(lèi)型 Participants 參與者 Budget, Resources, and Duration 預(yù)算 、 資源 和期限 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 29 Initiation啟動(dòng) ? The selfassessment should be initiated by a Baldrige Criteria Process Expert You! 自我評(píng)估應(yīng)該由波多里奇標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的過(guò)程專(zhuān)家 —在座的各位啟動(dòng) 。 Audit vs. Assessment – Warning Signals 審核：評(píng)估 警告信號(hào)（ 4） 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 16 Designing An Assessment Criteria People Process Need to engage capable people: this should not be difficult No problem: readymade, well proven criteria available Many options exist, and choices may determine success or failure 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 17 Matching Depth to Maturity Thorough Assessment Basic Assessment “ Just Right‖ Zone “ Overkill‖ Zone “ Limited Learning‖ Zone Maturity of Improvement Efforts Depth of Assessment 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 18 Types of Assessment ? Workshop format ? Internal nonspecialist evaluators with minimal training ? Simplified criteria ? minimal data gathering ? Realtime feedback Advanced Techniques Depth of Assessment Requirement External Assessment Joint Assessment Facilitated Assessment MiniAssessment ? Project format ? Trained internal assessors + external assessor / facilitator ? Flexible use of criteria ? minimal data gathering ? Planned data gathering ? Formal assessment report ? Dual team, twopass format ? Trained internal data gathering team ? Full criteria used ? Formal ―application report‖ ? Independent assessment team, with experienced external assessors ? Formal assessment report 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 19 2020/6/21 Prepared by Strategy, Risk and Rating (SRR) 科飛咨詢翻譯 20 Contrasts Between Awards and Assessment Best Practices Typical Good practice for a NationalLevel Award Examination (3rd. Party) Typical Good practice for an Assessment The process must scrupulously avoid being prescriptive: the examiners’ report will set out in detail the areas for improvement, but it must not suggest courses of action. And the examination process cannot go further than providing a report. The award applicants themselves have to decide what to do with this information, if anything. The assessment has to arrive at a prescription – that’s the whole point! So the assessment process needs to include some kind of prioritization and planning steps that will lead to a sound, well thoughout improvement plan. And it is valuable to have the assessors provide some guidance and ideas, as input to the planning step. The process goes to great lengths to avoid any bias or conflict of interest – real or perceived. This demands an arms length relationship between the examiners and applicants – for example there is little or no contact allowed before or after the site visit, and examiners are not allowed to bee consults for panies that they have sitevisited. In order to maximize the learning opportunities for people within the organization, it is desirable to have lots of contact between the outside experts and internal people – perhaps to develop a longterm working relationship. This need not promise the objectivity of the assessors if conflicts of interest are avoided. In order to be through and transparent, the examination process typically relies upon a very detailed and prehensive ―application report‖ which takes considerable effort to produce. The examiners use this document in two ways: to prepare for site visits, and to screen out lowerperforming applicants – thus avoiding many expensive and perhaps pointless site visits. If you aim is to plan for improvement, the application report can often be greatly simplified or even eliminated, thus saving considerable time and effort. An application report is not necessary if the assessment team i