Posted by Christine Schaefer If you’re a Baldrige examiner or possess similar expertise, you’re probably used to performing well on assessments. Test your knowledge now of five facts about the national Baldrige Award and program. Data on the whole show that Baldrige Award winners have created more jobs than similar organizations in their industries. True or false? An economic evaluation of the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, released in December 2011, determined that program benefits outweigh overall costs by a ratio of ____ to 1. A 2011 report determined that Baldrige Award-winning or site-visited hospitals outperformed other top U.S. hospitals on nearly every metric used to determine the industry’s prestigious ______________________ recognition. Applicants selected to receive the Baldrige Award ultimately receive about _________hours of scrutiny from Baldrige examiners and judges. U.S. subunits of foreign companies can apply for the Baldrige Award. True or false? Here are the correct answers: 1. True: For more information, see this Blogrige post, which also points out that "an analysis of data from two-time Baldrige Award winners shows that the median growth in number of sites was 67%, median growth in revenue was 94%, and median growth in jobs was 63%.The median growth in jobs was nearly 20 times greater than matched industries and time periods, according to Data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which indicated a comparative average job growth of 3.2%." 2. 820: The findings on the high benefit-to-cost ratio of the Baldrige Program echoed conclusions of a 2001 study, which was also conducted independently of the program by university economists. Significantly, both studies were undertaken when the Baldrige Program still received federal funding; with public-sector funds considered as costs, the 2011 report nonetheless concluded, The benefit-to-cost ratio of 820-to-1—using only the benefits for the surveyed group of applicants for the National Quality Award since 2006 but using all of the social costs of the Baldrige Program—certainly supports the belief that the Baldrige Program creates great value for the U.S. economy. The Baldrige Performance Excellence Program, with the imprimatur of national leadership and a prominent national award presented by the President, creates great value that could not be replicated by private sector actions alone. You can access the full report from this link on the Baldrige Web site. 3. Thomson Reuters National 100 Top Hospitals: What’s more, a 2012 report by Truven Health Analytics (formerly known as Thomson Reuter’s health care business) affirmed for the second time in two years the value of Baldrige practices by top-performing U.S. hospitals; you can access the report from this link to the Baldrige Web site. 4. 1,000: If your organization is interested in applying for the 2014 award process, please note that updated Baldrige Award Application Forms and guidance will be posted on the Web site by the end of this month. 5. True: And here’s some good news on expanded award eligibility: beginning in 2014, large organizations with multiple subunits interested in applying for the award will no longer be subject to a limit on the number that can do so during the same year. Whether or not you received a perfect score on this trivia quiz, with the answers and links provided above, you’re now equipped with additional facts for making a strong case to use the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence and apply for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. We hope you share these facts with leaders of any organizations that you wish to see excelling long into the future.

Posted by Dawn Marie Bailey At a recent Boston University-hosted event, leading health care professionals pitched innovative ideas on how to solve the nation’s most pressing problems on a tight budget. Eight teams had two minutes each to describe their innovation projects and their importance, as well as the project’s funding cost, choosing from just $12,500, $7,500, or $2,500. Like the singing competition show American Idol, participants at the event texted in their votes of support. The teams who won received the following prizes: $12,500 prize to build an online network for health care professionals to exchange solutions to complex medical problems $7,500 to introduce e-cigarettes to wean the homeless off tobacco $2,500 to recreate a program that addresses patients’ basic resource needs as a quality care standard Among the health systems participating was Baldrige Award recipient Henry Ford Health System. Managing for innovation is a core value in the Baldrige Health Care Criteria for Performance Excellence and its importance cannot be overestimated (even if you are given just two minutes to propose an innovation!). According to the Criteria, "innovation means making meaningful change to improve your organization’s health care services, programs, processes, operations, health care delivery model, and business model, with the purpose of creating new value for stakeholders. Innovation should lead your organization to new dimensions of performance." The Criteria contain even more learning about innovation that can be part of strategic thinking at any organization in any sector. For example, when thinking about innovation, consider Does your organization have a supportive environment for innovation that can be further supported by a performance improvement system? Does your organization have a process for identifying strategic opportunities? Does your organization have an environment and learning culture that support the pursuit of intelligent risks? Does your organization have the ability to rapidly disseminate and capitalize on organizational knowledge to drive innovation? Given these considerations, if you had two minutes and a tight budget, what innovative idea would you pitch for your organization?

I am sure that most of you heard the Baldrige news yesterday. What a great day! But this blog is not only about conveying congratulations to our newest role-model Baldrige Award recipients but giving a little perspective on the events of the past 10 days. The Meeting Begins On Monday, November 4th, the Baldrige judges met at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for the final phase of a five-month effort to determine which organizations should be recommended for the 2013 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award—the highest Presidential honor for organizational performance excellence. They arrived around 7:30 a.m. and were quickly led to a secluded conference room in the maze-like basement of NIST’s administration building. The room had been prepped for their arrival: a large "U"-shape arrangement of tables with plenty of room to spread out; an entire back wall lined with additional tables holding boxes, crates, and file folders containing materials that represented thousands of hours of effort by Baldrige Award applicants, volunteer examiner teams, and the judges themselves; and a computer, projector, speaker phone, and one dinky little table with muffins, fruit, and coffee. After some procedural activities and a thoughtful review of the meeting purpose and processes, the fun began … three-and-a-half days later, the seal was broken, the door opened, and the judges staggered out with their final recommendations. Of course, I am only kidding, but to those who haven’t had the privilege to serve as a Baldrige judge or staff member, that might seem to be what happens. A Rigorous Process In reality, during this final meeting of the 2013 Baldrige Award process, the judges follow a very rigorous process for each applicant that received a site visit: Judges conflicted with a particular applicant receive none of its materials; conflicted judges leave the room for any and all sharing or conversation about that applicant. The lead judge for each applicant presents an overview of the organization, reviewing the examiner team’s overall findings, and reviewing the questions and issues the judges identified during their preliminary review of the application and detailed site-visit findings prior to the meeting. The lead judge then facilitates a conference call with the site visit team leader, exploring a standard set of questions asked of all team leaders. After the first call, the judges discuss what was conveyed and engage in dialogue to determine what issues and questions still remain to make a national role-model determination. A second call is held with the site visit team leader to probe very specific issues needing clarity or verification. After the second call, the judges debrief what they have learned, ensure that there are no further questions that need to be asked of the team leader, and identify the applicant’s key strengths and opportunities related to potential role-model status. Finally, a multilevel voting process occurs that requires a super-majority of judges to recommend a Baldrige Award recipient. After each applicant is discussed, a judge assigned as the process checker for that applicant leads a debrief, looking for opportunities to improve. The average cycle time for a given applicant is about three and a half hours, but since the judges’ motto is "it’s not over ‘til it’s over," further discussion later in the meeting is not uncommon. Final Recipients On Thursday, November 7th, around 3:30 p.m., it was finally over … or was it? The judging had been completed, with the three recipients and two additional organizations recognized for category-level best practices, but much remained to be done. Judges called team leaders to discuss suggested edits to the feedback reports that would be sent to applicants (yes, even award recipients receive feedback!). Press releases, recipient profiles, and talking points were finalized. Dr. John Jasinski, the chair of the Panel of Judges, and I met with Pat Gallagher, the acting deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Commerce and director of NIST, to share the judges’ recommendations. The Department of Commerce was notified of the recommendations, and on Tuesday, November 12th, I traveled to D.C. to meet with U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and Pat Gallagher to call the recipients. Secretary Pritzker congratulated the winners, expressing her confidence that the three organizations will undoubtedly continue the Baldrige legacy and serve as role models for their peers in the health care and education sectors. I also have to share with you that Secretary Pritzker thoroughly enjoyed her conversations with each of the recipients. I hope you will join me in extending sincere congratulations to our recipients: three organizations with a deep commitment to excellence, driven by their desire to achieve outstanding results for the benefit of their stakeholders (students and patients, staff members and employees, families and communities). It’s a commitment that starts at the very top, is clearly a part of their culture, and anchors organizational decisions and directions. Pewaukee School District, Pewaukee, WI (education) Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano, Plano, TX (health care) Sutter Davis Hospital, Davis, CA (health care) It is worth noting that each of these role model organizations has also won a top-tier award in the Baldrige-based program of its state (the Wisconsin Forward Award, the Texas Award for Performance Excellence, and the California Awards for Performance Excellence, respectively). Finally, I hope you will join me and applaud these two health care organizations for demonstrating excellence in leadership (category 1 of the Baldrige Criteria) as part of the 2013 Baldrige Award process: Duke University Hospital, Durham, NC Hill Country Memorial, Fredericksburg, TX Congratulations to all and a big thank you to all the many volunteer examiners and judges who make this program and the award process possible! To learn more about the best practices of these national role models, in addition to the best practices of other Baldrige Award recipients, attend the 26th annual Quest for Excellence Conference® April 7-9, 2014, in Baltimore, MD

We within the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program at NIST are delighted to share this news from today’s NIST Tech Beat: Fangmeyer Named as New Baldrige Program Director.  Congratulations, Bob! Robert (Bob) Fangmeyer, deputy director of the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program (BPEP) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has been selected to be the program’s new director. He will be only the third director to lead the BPEP since its establishment by Congress in 1987. Fangmeyer has served as acting director since his predecessor, Harry Hertz, retired in June, 2013. Fangmeyer started with the BPEP in 1997, holding multiple positions that increased in scope and responsibility over time: staff member, supervisory business specialist, team leader, senior staff-program analyst, deputy director and acting director. He has played a leading role in the development of the Baldrige Criteria, the creation of the program’s executive fellows program, and in Baldrige international activities. Fangmeyer has helped lead the Baldrige Program’s efforts to transform its business model, business plan and organizational relationships as the program has transitioned over the past year to be fully funded by the private sector. He also has represented the program as a speaker at national and international events, and is the primary liaison to the network of Baldrige-based state and local award programs. Prior to the BPEP, Fangmeyer worked for six years as a human resources specialist in NIST’s Office of Workforce Management. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in psychology from Villanova University and a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Maryland. BPEP is managed by NIST in cooperation with the private sector. The program raises awareness about the importance of performance excellence in driving the U.S. and global economy; provides organizational assessment tools and criteria; educates leaders in all types of organizations about the practices of national role models; and recognizes them with the Baldrige Award in six categories: manufacturing, service, small business, health care, education and nonprofit. BPEP also is a partner in the Baldrige Enterprise, which includes the private-sector Baldrige Foundation, the Alliance for Performance Excellence—a body made up of the 33-plus state, local, regional and sector-specific Baldrige-based programs serving nearly all 50 states; and ASQ, an international organization promoting quality. Thousands of organizations worldwide use the Baldrige Criteria to guide their operations, improve performance and get sustainable results. This proven improvement and innovation framework offers organizations an integrated approach to key management areas. The criteria are regularly updated to reflect the best practices from the latest validated management techniques. The Baldrige Award, named after Malcolm Baldrige, the 26th Secretary of Commerce, is not given for specific products or services. Since 1988, 96 organizations have received the award. For more information, go to www.nist.gov/baldrige.  

Posted by Dawn Marie Bailey A few months ago, Patient Room 2020 was unveiled, with more than 30 organizations kicking in technology and materials to produce a prototype for the patient room of the future, "a room designed to enhance both patient engagement and caregiver performance and efficiency." Among the contributors, Baldrige Award recipient Milliken customized antibacterial textiles for linens and scrubs. This "wholesale rethinking of the patient environment" began with a 2006 grant to produce the hospital room of the future that could improve health care outcomes. "Patient Room 2020 is designed to address some glaring shortcomings rife in the health care system today: a lack of patient engagement in his or her own treatment, hospital-acquired infections, caregiver inefficiency, and overall patient discomfort. . . . Each element was chosen for a reason and placed in the right location to enhance both patient engagement and caregiver performance and efficiency. It’s a systems approach-something that has long been employed to boost efficiency in other industries but has been sorely lacking in basic patient care, where things are often still done piecemeal with pen and clipboard." Talk of a systems approach and how the design of a room could actually impact health care outcomes led me to the Baldrige Health Care Criteria for Performance Excellence and the guidance within on taking into consideration patients’ expectations and requirements for their health care services-and in this case for their hospital rooms. Category 3 of the Criteria specifically relate to the voice of the customer and how to determine  patients’ and other customers’ satisfaction and engagement. According to the Health Care Criteria, voice-of-the-customer processes are intended to be proactive and continuously innovative so that they capture patients’ and other customers’ stated, unstated, and anticipated requirements, expectations, and desires. In order for a room design and the technology within to truly impact health care outcomes, I would assume that these patient requirements, expectations, and desires must be part of the design considerations. It all leads back to what a health care provider can do to ensure patient engagement in his or her own treatment. Listening to the voice of the customer is probably one of the best ways to start. And, of course, to me, it all leads back to the guidance in the Health Care Criteria on how to serve patients’ and other customers’ needs in order to engage them and build relationships. How would you design your patient room of the future?

Posted by Harry Hertz, the Baldrige Cheermudgeon Recently, I read a blog posting about the "Myths of Motivation." The point of the post is that motivating employees takes some time and energy and is not formulaic; one size does not fit all. The author then discusses four misconceptions about employee motivation: It is all up to the boss. No it isn’t! You can’t force employees to be motivated, but you can encourage them to be self-motivated by creating the appropriate environment. You know exactly what your employees want. No you don’t! Each employee is unique and what motivates each of them might not be the same that motivates you. Job satisfaction = motivation. No it isn’t! Satisfaction and engagement are not equivalent. You need an alignment between organizational goals and personal goals. Then you achieve engagement and motivation because your employee now identifies with the organization. How often have we heard, "It’s a job; I am satisfied." All you need is cash. No, not true! People want fair and adequate compensation, but beyond that they want to identify with their job and organization. They want to learn. They want a work culture that makes them look forward to coming to work and contributing. Is any of this surprising? It certainly isn’t if you have been using the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence as a management systems framework. Workforce motivation has been a part of the Baldrige Criteria for many years and in 2007 we started a focus on workforce engagement, recognizing that workforce satisfaction alone did not lead to engagement and loyalty. Some of the key concepts in workforce engagement that are included in the Baldrige Criteria include: How do senior leaders communicate with and engage the entire workforce? How do they encourage frank, two-way conversation? How do you determine key elements that affect workforce engagement for different workforce groups and segments? How do you ensure that your organizational culture benefits from the diverse ideas, cultures, and thinking of your workforce? How does your learning and development system support the organization’s needs and the personal development of your workforce members? How do you manage effective career progression for your workforce members? How do you analyze key business results to identify opportunities for improvement in both workforce engagement and business results? How would your organization and its leaders answer these questions? Would their current answers lead to an engaged workforce? Let me know what you think!

Posted by Dawn Marie Bailey The value of organizational awards to engaging the workforce, driving business success, and sharing best practices is highlighted in a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article that focuses attention on the number of "most-admired" companies with headquarters or major operations in Pittsburgh, PA—among them two Baldrige Award recipients. The May 16, 2013, article, entitled "Best Practices Make Perfect an Engaged Workforce and Commitments to Sustainability can Drive Business Success," describes the "most widely respected honor in business [as] the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award." The story begins with the description of a small business growing fast but without an entirely engaged workforce. So, the small business polls its workforce to identify critical issues to address, and after several years, addressing the issues leads to a national award for workforce engagement. The article quotes Aimee Kane, assistant professor of management at Duquesne University’s Palumbo Donahue School of Business: "Awards—whether they recognize an engaged workforce or best practices in safety, diversity or cutting-edge product development—can motivate employees and translate to employees feeling more responsible and invested." She adds, "If the award seems real and prestigious in the eyes of others whose opinions they care about or trust, it can lead [employees] to feel more proud that they belong to the organization . . . and they’ll act on behalf of that group. It feels good to have others think well of you." The article names a whole number of awards received by the elite companies of Pittsburgh—several of which have a connection to Baldrige. For example, a gentleman from Alcoa served as a judge for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, and local company and 2003 and 2010 Baldrige Award winner MEDRAD, Inc. is now Bayer HealthCare Radiology & Interventional, which has some U.S. headquarters in Pittsburgh. In addition, Westinghouse Electric’s nuclear fuel division, with a plant and headquarters near Pittsburgh, received one of the first-ever Baldrige Awards in 1988. So is there a link between employee engagement and other results and organizational awards? According to this article, those plaques and trophies of these elite Pittsburgh organizations sure make their employees feel good about their jobs.

On Thanksgiving, my husband and I volunteered at a local nursing home. We were not aware of our volunteer tasks before we arrived at the facility, but once we met with organizers, we were assigned to areas where help was most needed. As volunteers, we brought our own special skills and talents to completing these tasks.  Whether it was serving lemonade or tea to residents and their families in the dining hall, helping to set up dining room tables with tablecloths and dishes, wheeling residents from their rooms to the dining hall, serving plates of food to the residents and their families, feeding a resident who could not manage it for himself, or just visiting with residents who did not have family with them for the Thanksgiving meal—we were put to good use.   At one point, I looked across the room to see my husband with small beads of perspiration on his forehead as he was setting up tables while juggling conversations with patients who were just wheeled into the dining hall. He had a huge smile on his face and, later when we discussed our experiences, he said he had a great time engaging the residents in conversation. Everyone there knew that every task was an important one, and there was no shortage of help because we each contributed to making Thanksgiving a special occasion for the residents and their families. A couple of days after our volunteer experience, I read this quote: The highest reward for a person’s work is not what they get for it, but what they become because of it. — John Ruskin Giving your time and talent can be one of the most rewarding opportunities we will experience in our lifetime, and one unique volunteer opportunity is to become a Baldrige examiner.Baldrige examiners are an elite group of professionals who commit their knowledge, skills, and time to help evaluate applicants for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award—the only Presidential award for organizational performance excellence. Their evaluations are used by organizations for improving not only their own systems but contributing to improving the entire U.S. economy.   Examiners have the unique opportunity to explore in-depth examples of best practices, innovation, planning strategies, and ways to engage customers and the workforce—learning that helps to build their own professional acumen. Please consider sharing your time and talent with U.S. organizations. The application process for appointment to the 2014 Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Board of Examiners will close at 6:00 PM on January 9, 2014. We hope to see your application in the pool for selection to the board. Please visit the Baldrige Web site to learn more about how to become a Baldrige examiner.

Posted by Harry Hertz, the Baldrige Cheermudgeon The selection of words used in the Criteria for Performance Excellence is by design, i.e., in general there is a deliberate intent with the words used and the order in which they are presented. While that intent is clear to the authors of the criteria, it is not always obvious to criteria users, for good reason. They can’t get inside the mind of those who create the criteria. With that realization in mind, I thought it might be good to write a periodic Blogrige post about some of those language nuances. This is the first blog in that series. It deals with language nuances in the results category. The most important category, from the perspective of criticality to organizational sustainability, is the results category with 45% of the total points in the Baldrige scoring system. With limited exceptions all the questions in that category begin with, "What are your current levels and trends in key measures or indicators of …(some aspect of organizational performance)." This is intentional to make clear that quantitative/numerical results are expected. Furthermore, not only is the current performance level expected, but also how that performance has changed over time to indicate improvements or challenges to good performance. It is a guide to decision-making for the future. However, there are a few results questions that do not ask for levels and trends, but have a more general request for "results." These questions are in item 7.1c on Supply-Chain Management Results and all of item 7.4 on Leadership and Governance Results. This choice of language is intentional because not all results in these areas are amenable to quantitative measures or trending. For example, in item 7.4 many of the results may be qualitative. It is not enough to say fines for violating law or regulation have gone down, but you want to know what caused the fines and how the problem was solved. As another example, results of intelligent risk-taking may not be trendable (# of risks over time?) because a significant risk that led to new product or that was aborted at the right time is by itself an important result. That said, this does not mean that numerical information should be avoided. Using the scoring guidelines, where a result is numeric and trendable that result should be reported. The lack of requirement for levels and trends should not be used as a directive to not include them when appropriate. I hope this helps clarify the intentionality of the language difference in some results item questions. If there other criteria language questions you would like to see addressed in Blogrige, please let me know. Thanks!  

Posted by Dawn Marie Bailey In late fall, Sri Lanka announced its national quality award winners for 2013 in the large- scale manufacturing category. Among them was Coca-Cola Beverages Sri Lanka Limited (CCBSL). The annual Sri Lanka National Quality Award is "based on the world-renowned Malcolm Baldrige model" and recognizes Sri Lankan organizations that excel in quality management and achievement. Although the number of U.S. business applicants for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award, on which the Sri Lankan award is based, is not the sole measure for the value of the Baldrige Criteria (for example, we know of many organizations in the United States and around the world that adapt the Criteria for self-assessments and for their own internal quality programs), many of us have of course lamented the fact that more U.S. businesses have not applied for the award in recent years—not just for the recognition but for the objective feedback received on the organization’s strengths and opportunities for improvement. Perhaps one strategy to re-engage U.S. businesses in applying might be to remind them of the value that manufacturers in other countries are finding. Here are just a few examples: Proof of a Commitment to Quality and Top Standards "This award is a testament to our commitment," said Kapila Welmillage, country manager, Coca-Cola Beverages Sri Lanka. "I also want to take this opportunity to congratulate my team at CCBSL, who have worked very hard to maintain our top-quality standards and win us this award." Coca-Cola Sri Lanka ‘s production facility in Biyagama was also named by the Coca-Cola India & South West Asia Business Unit among the top-60 plants in The Coca-Cola System worldwide. "This award reinforces our commitment to high quality as we continue to build a world-class, sustainable business in Sri Lanka," added Abhishek Jugran, country manager—Sri Lanka & Maldives, Coca-Cola Far East Ltd. Better Production and Services, Costs Reduced, Performance Increased In an August 2012 article in International Business Research by Fariba Azizzadeh, Morad Shamsi, Seidmehdi Veiseh, and Farideh Kamari, we found that even businesses in Urmia, the 10th-most-populated city in Iran, are recommended the Baldrige Criteria as one model of improvement for "small industries" and "industrial estates." According to the authors, "quality improvement programs appear to be significant more than ever in order to achieve better production and services, costs reduction, and increasing the performance." One piece of research also noted in the study "Limitation and Difficulty Analysis of Quality Improvement Program Implementation in Urmia Small Industries" is that "manager’s support and commitment . . . play a significant role in quality improving programs." Customers Reward Quality In another example, we found a study called "Commitment to Service Quality in Automotive Dealerships: Results from an Australian Pilot Study" that stated "the importance of quality products and quality service to consumers cannot be overstated. . . . Customers explicitly reward quality." In the study, 2005 Baldrige Award recipient Park Place Lexus was recognized for receiving the "prestigious" Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award and improving customer quality at its dealership. Challenges of implementing quality improvement systems at Australian dealerships are noted, among them lack of consistency in approaches and difficulties in developing quality cultures. The authors, Chihiro Watanabe, Hans-Henrik Hvolby, and Kym Fraser, lay out four factors for the success of quality improvement models, factors that are all embedded in the Baldrige Criteria: Top management commitment Customer focus and satisfaction Employee involvement Process management Conclusion Whether to apply for a Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (or a state- or sector-level Baldrige-based award), manufacturers, small businesses, and service organizations from around the world are seeing the value of the Baldrige Criteria. My hope is that this same value is clearly seen in U.S. business as well.