1. Top-100 list again demonstrates Baldrige impact in U.S. health care

    March 14, 2014 by nick.halley

    In early March, Truven Health Analytics released its annual study identifying the 100 top hospitals (PDF) based on their overall organizational performance.

    As in previous years, health care organizations using the Baldrige Health Care Criteria for Performance Excellence as a management framework were well represented. Some of these organizations have been formally recognized by the national Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award or state and sector-specific Baldrige-based awards of Alliance for Performance Excellence programs across the country. Other organizations on the list have applied for Baldrige feedback/recognition at the national or state levels but cannot be publicly named as applicants due to confidentiality policies of the award programs.

    According to Truven, the health care organizations on its list have achieved performance excellence and are leading their peer hospitals in demonstrating high-quality patient outcomes while improving efficiency. Truven states that based on the results of this year’s study, if all Medicare inpatients received the same level of care as those treated in the award-winning facilities, the following would be possible:

    • More than 165,000 additional lives could be saved.
    • Nearly 90,000 additional patients could be complication-free.
    • $5.4 billion could be saved.
    • The average patient stay would decrease by nearly half a day.

    In addition, in releasing its 2013 100 top-hospitals list (PDF), Truven Health Analytics stated that by using publicly available data, it learned that the best hospitals and health systems do the following:

    • Follow Baldrige practices closely
    • Demonstrate excellence across the organization, delivering top-notch patient outcomes, keeping costs down and finances stable so that they can invest more back into patient care, following recommended processes and providing value to the community as a high-quality employer and trusted care partner
    • Exhibit a culture of excellence and performance improvement that pervades every aspect of their organizations—from housekeeping to patient care to administration
    • Have leaders with common approaches to management and organizational goal development

    National Baldrige Award winners or Baldrige-based Alliance program award winners that made the 2014 list include the following:

    • Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital (Downers Grove, IL), 2010 Illinois Performance Excellence recipient, 2010 Baldrige Award recipient
    • Advocate Lutheran General Hospital (Park Ridge, IL), 2012 Illinois Performance Excellence recipient
    • Duke University Hospital (Durham, NC), 2013 Governor’s Award of Performance Excellence in Healthcare recipient (North Carolina)
    • INOVA Fair Oaks Hospital (Fairfax, VA), 2006 U.S. Senate Productivity and Quality Award (VA) recipient
    • Kettering Medical Center (Kettering, OH)—parent Kettering Health Network, 2010 Governor’s Award for Excellence (OH) recipient
    • SSM St. Joseph Hospital West Lake (Saint Louis, MO)—parent SSM Health Care, 2011 Missouri Quality Award recipient, 2002 Baldrige Award recipient
    • St. David’s Medical Center and St. David’s North Austin Medical Center (Austin, TX)—parent St David’s Healthcare System, 2008 Texas Award for Performance Excellence recipient
    • Sutter Davis Hospital (Davis, CA), 2012 Governor’s Award for Performance Excellence (CA) recipient; 2013 Baldrige Award recipient
    • Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Rockwall (Rockwall, TX)—parent Texas Health Resources, 2013 Texas Award for Performance Excellence recipient
    • University of Colorado Hospital (Aurora, CO)—part of a joint operating agreement with Poudre Valley Health System, 2010 Rocky Mountain Performance Excellence recipient, 2008 Baldrige Award recipient

    The close relationship between top-performing hospitals and the Baldrige Criteria was also a significant finding in a 2012 Truven survey of hospital chief executive officers. That affirmation of the Baldrige impact on health care reemphasized the findings of a 2011 study, also by Truven Health Analytics (then known as the health care business of Thomson Reuters), that hospitals that had won the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award or been considered for a Baldrige site visit outperform other hospitals in nearly every metric used to determine the 100 top hospitals, including metrics for patient outcomes(mortality, complications, safety), core measures, HCAHPS, and profitability/expenses.


    This post was originally published on The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) which is an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce.


  2. Benchmark Memo: March 2014

    March 10, 2014 by ahmed

    Greetings to our members,

    Read our Standard Benchmark Memo (for all members) or our SPRING Singapore Benchmarking Memo (for members from Singapore)

    This month’s content includes:

    1. Premium Best Practice Report – Social Media
    2. Health Care Best Practices
    3. Featured Case Study – University of Detroit Mercy
    4. BPIR Tip of the Month – Journals and Publications

    Best Regards,

    neil-sig

    Neil Crawford
    BPIR.com


  3. How is business excellence promoted in your country?

    March 5, 2014 by ahmed

    Adam Stoehr, MBA
    Excellence Canada
    Vice President, Education

    Who said business excellence is not fun? Canada continues to lead the way in promoting business excellence and improvement in a fun way to get the message across. Last year Excellence Canada released a remix rap song called “That’s how we roll!”, this year Excellence Canada made another clip to promote business excellence.
    Check out this song written and sung by: Adam Stoehr, Vice President, Education, Excellence Canada. For music aficionados the song is a remix of Blurred Lines by Robin Thicke with Pharrell and T.I.


  4. RADAR – The EFQM’s management tool

    by nick.halley

    You are possibly very familiar with the EFQM’s RADAR as the tool within the EFQM Excellence Model that we use to assess an organisation – identifying strengths and areas for improvement and scoring.

    But did you know that when RADAR was originally launched the EFQM intended that the tool should be used in day-to-day management, and not solely for assessment? The RADAR developers realised that a truly effective tool for assessment should be based, not upon something different or additional to good management practice, but rather upon what any good manager or management team should be doing in their daily work.

    A look at the RADAR logic upon which the acronym RADAR was based, will help illustrate this.

    The logic suggests that as managers we should first be clear about the objectives that we are seeking to achieve within our organisation, whether at strategic or tactical levels, and that we should turn these into clear and targeted measures that upon implementation will represent the Results that the organisation is achieving. Next we need to identify and develop where necessary the Approaches required to achieve these Results. These Approaches then need to be Deployed. Finally through a process of Assessment andRefinement, we should regularly review our ongoing performance Results and identify and implement appropriate improvement action where necessary. This simple but important logic provides a framework both for effective planning – strategically and tactically, and for organisational performance reviews. The logic becomes even more valuable when used with the nine criteria within the EFQM Excellence Model. The four Results criteria stimulate thinking, particularly during strategic planning, in terms of the range of measures that could be used and challenge us as to whether our organisational objectives and corresponding measures are truly based upon the needs and expectations of our stakeholders. The five Enabler criteria help us when considering the scope of Approaches that we need to have in place and Deploy in order to deliver the Results that we have identified.

    If we consider RADAR in more detail, focusing not only on the high level elements but also on the detailed attributes – such as ‘sound’, ‘integrated’ and so on, then the use of RADAR in both planning and daily management activities such as performance reviews becomes even more useful.

    RADAR BASED BUSINESS & WORK PLANNING

    RADAR ELEMENT:

    THINGS TO CONSIDER BASED ON THE ATTRIBUTES:

    RESULTS:

    1. What are the business/department/team/individual objectives that the plan addresses? e.g. increase in leadership competencies to meet future business challenges.
    2. How will we measure the successful achievement of these objectives? (the outcomes)
    3. What targets will we set for these measures and what is the basis of these? e.g. aim to better competitor ‘x’, become best-in-class, etc.
    4. What comparative data (where relevant) will we use to measure progress towards our objectives? e.g. benchmarks.

    APPROACH:

    1. What will the plan deliver in order to meet the objectives? e.g. leadership training, leadership performance review process, etc.
    2. What will the plan include, and where necessary what it will not include?
    3. How were the deliverables identified, including selection criteria?
    4. What are the priorities for the various deliverables?
    5. What are the benefits of the deliverables to the stakeholders concerned? e.g. the investors, customers, employees, etc.
    6. How will the plan objectives and deliverables specifically link to the organisations vision/mission/goals/strategy?
    7. How will the plan objectives and deliverables support the values of the organisation?

    DEPLOYMENT:

    1. Who will be responsible for achievement of each objective and associateddeliverable, and what will be his/her/their roles, responsibilities and accountabilities?
    2. What are the key activities related to each deliverable?
    3. What are the timescales for these activities? (start and finish, milestones)
    4. What resources are required? e.g. finance, equipment, people, skills.
    5. What constraints exist? e.g. existing process capacity, resources, regulations, laws, standards, deadlines.
    6. What risks exist? e.g. overspend, unforeseen changes in external environment, lack of commitment internally,  and how they will be addressed.
    7. What communication needs exist and how they will be addressed?

    ASSESSMENT & REFINEMENT:

    1. What indicator measures will we use to measure progress with the plan? (NOTE: Include measures that will enable you to predict whether outcomes listed under “Results” will be achieved).
    2. How will we ensure the integrity of the measures we use?
    3. How will we review progress with the plan, identify learning (internally and externally), stimulate creativity and innovation (e.g. in identifying and addressing ‘road blocks’ that might arise), take corrective action and make improvements?

    In a similar way RADAR can be used when conducting a review of organisational performance. It stimulates the management team to consider:

    RADAR BASED ORGANISATIONAL PERFORMANCE REVIEWS

    (based upon reviewing a single result or a set of results)

    RADAR ELEMENT:

    THINGS TO CONSIDER BASED ON THE ATTRIBUTES:

    RESULTS:

    1. Are we measuring the right things?
    2. Are the results segmented where needed?
    3. Is the integrity of the results assured?
    4. Are we clear on our targets and are they appropriate?
    5. How is our performance against target?
    6. Do we have any comparative data, how appropriate is it and what does it tell us in terms of our performance?
    7. Are we clear on what is causing the results?

    APPROACH:

    1. What are the approaches (e.g. Leadership, Resources, People, Processes) that we have in place to deliver the result(s) we are reviewing?
    2. Are they fit for purpose?
    3. Do they align as necessary with other approaches?
    4. Are they aligned with stakeholder needs and expectations?
    5. Do they support and align with our overallgoals/objectives/strategy/values?

    DEPLOYMENT:

    1. Are we implementing the relevant approaches where they need to be?
    2. Are we doing so effectively and efficiently?
    3. Does the way we implement our approaches enable flexibility and support organisational agility?

    ASSESSMENT & REFINEMENT:

    1. Are our indicator measures fit for purpose?
    2. Are we learning from our own experiences (positive and negative) and from those of others?
    3. Are we generating new ideas on what to do and how to do it where needed?
    4. Are we making improvements based on our learning as needed?
    5. Are we turning good ideas into reality?

     

    These are just two examples of how RADAR can be used to ensure effective planning and daily management. Perhaps you can think of other applications, or have developed and used some of your own. If so we’d be delighted to hear about them so that we can spread the word about RADAR good practices within the EFQM Community.

    ABOUT THE AUTHOR – MARK WEBSTER – EFQM FACULTY MEMBER, RADAR DEVELOPER

    Mark Webster is a member of EFQM’s Faculty of Trainers.  He has been involved in many significant developments within EFQM over the years, and led the development of the 1999 version of the Model, which included the first version of RADAR.


    This article was originally published on EFQM.com by Mark Webster


  5. Journal of Inspiration Economy – Call for papers by 15 June

    March 4, 2014 by ahmed

     

    Introduction
    The Journal of Inspiration Economy (JIE) is peer reviewed journal which is a newly established International Journal; and just started to accept manuscripts for publication for its first issues.

    JIE editorial board is happy to invite all the authors, scientists, practitioners, researchers and academics all over the world to participate in this new initiative “inspiring journal” that have the purpose for creating a knowledge sharing community relevant to Inspiration, Inspiration for Community, Inspiration for Survival, Inspiration for Re-Building Society Fabric, Inspirational Economy Future, Inspiration through Diversity and Co-existence management Inspiration, including Inspiration for establishing Entrepreneurship Spirit that would support the innovation of the economy.

    Aim and Scope
    The main aim of the Journal of Inspiration Economy (JIE) is to publish refereed, well-written original research articles that describe the latest research and developments that in areas that move the inspiration principles and management in the world. This a broad-based journal covering all branches of Org. Learning, Org. Innovation, Org. Competitiveness, Org. Excellence, Org. Knowledge Management, Knowledge Economy, Learning Economy and Innovation Economy. JIE is a peer-reviewed journal and published twice a year.

    Manuscripts in all areas of all applied and researched work relevant to inspiration that leads countries, communities and government towards more stable and sustainable economical practices will be of high consideration. However, to be acceptable for publication in the JIE, papers must make significant and original contributions. Papers clearly motivated towards actual or potential application in reality would be of high interest.

    Information For Authors

    • JIE would follow a blind reviewing process, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process. Each article submitted to us will be reviewed by at least 2 reviewers. Moreover the papers will be checked for linguistic consistency. Thematic review will decide whether to accept or reject according to the originality, significance for theory and practice, quality of content and presentation of submitted paper.
    • Journal of Inspiration Economy (JIE) is dedicated to rapid publication of the highest quality short papers, regular papers, and expository papers. Papers which exceed the above page limit will be accepted subject to the approval of the Editorial Board. Research in all areas that move the inspiration principles and management in the world will be considered for publication.
    • Submitted papers should not have been previously published nor be currently under consideration for publication elsewhere (N.B. Conference papers may only be submitted if the paper was not originally copyrighted and if it has been completely re-written). All papers are refereed through a double blind review process. A guide for authors, sample copies and other relevant information for submitting papers are available on the Submission of Papers page.
    • Authors are required to submit their papers in the MS Word format to the following Email id with a copy to the Editor- in-Chief of the Journal.

    Submission of Papers:
    Currently JIE would be correspond by e-mail for convenience and speed of the 1st issues. However, later JIE would accept all participations through its coming web site. Authors may submit papers in English to any of the Editorial Board members. A Postscript with a cover letter must be sent to the corresponding editor by e-mail. The cover letter should give the authors preferred address, e-mail address and phone number. The postscript should indicate the intended publication format (Short paper, Regular paper or Expository paper). Each submission should include an informative abstract of no more than 200 words.

    Manuscript Style, Illustrations and Photos

    • Accepted manuscripts must be written in Times Roman format, not exceeding 20 pages. Figures should be in EPS (Post Script Format).
    • It is the authors responsibility to prepare papers as per formatting instructions of the publisher. Accepted papers may not be published unless they meet the publishers formatting standard. All the papers would use Harvard reference style.
    • By submitting a manuscript for publication to Journal of Inspiration Economy (JIE), authors acknowledge that the work is original and is not being submitted to another journal. The submission of a manuscript by the authors implies that the authors automatically agree to assign exclusive copyright to JIE if and when the manuscript is accepted for publication.

    Prospective authors should send their manuscript directly to the following to me or through JIE Founding Editor at this time. Please note that we are also seeking for qualified reviewers. Please register through sending an e-mail and mention your area of interest of where your role be most suitable as a reviewer or put the title of the paper and abstract of the paper you are expected to participate in or before 15 June 2014.

    Please send your request to:
    buhejim@gmail.com, or buheji@buheji.com

    Please circulate this email to all your friends where you feel they would like to contribute and share their efforts and research on the business of change and inspiration to their organisations, society and/or the world.

    Many thanks for your support

    Best regards,
    Dr. Mohamed Buheji
    Founding Editor (JIE)