5th Annual DOD Conference June 25-26, 2003


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

5th Annual DOD Conference June 25-26, 2003

  1. 1. Aligning Baldridge and AACSB Criteria to Enhance Education Andres Fortino Associate Dean George Mason University
  2. 2. Session Mission <ul><li>George Mason University's School of Management is in the process of aligning the Baldrige criteria to the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB) criteria and undertaking efforts to measure and optimize its organizational performance. </li></ul><ul><li>This session will describe the process that was created and the preliminary data and results from its application. </li></ul><ul><li>Anyone interested in using Baldrige as the platform for performance tracking and continuous improvement may benefit from attending this session </li></ul>
  3. 3. Value Proposition <ul><li>The Baldrige Quality Program may be used successfully to better manage the performance of educational organizations and their accreditation initiatives </li></ul><ul><li>Note that the purpose IS NOT pursuing the Baldrige award BUT: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Manage the institution better </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Maintain its accreditation </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. The Baldrige Initiative <ul><li>The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award was created by Public Law 100-107, signed into law on August 20, 1987 </li></ul><ul><li>It was thought that a national quality award program the US would help improve quality and productivity by: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>helping to stimulate American companies to improve quality and productivity … while obtaining a competitive edge </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>recognizing the achievements of those companies that improve the quality … and providing an example to others; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>establishing guidelines and criteria that can be used by business, industrial, governmental, and other organizations in evaluating their own quality improvement efforts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>providing specific guidance for other American organizations that wish to learn how to manage for high quality by making available detailed information on how winning organizations were able to change their cultures and achieve eminence </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. The Baldrige Award <ul><li>Since 1988, 684 applications have been submitted for the Baldrige award from a wide variety of types and sizes of companies </li></ul><ul><li>From 1988-2002 51 organizations have received the award </li></ul><ul><li>Over 1,400 Baldrige examiners have been trained to analyze performance in organizations </li></ul><ul><li>Baldrige is seen in the United States and abroad as the standard for improving performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>provides a clearly marked path toward excellence that any organization </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Baldrige for Education <ul><li>The Criteria are the basis for </li></ul><ul><ul><li>organizational self-assessments, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>making Awards, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>giving feedback to applicants. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>In addition, the Criteria have three important roles: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>to help improve organizational performance practices, capabilities, and results </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>to facilitate communication and sharing of best practices information among U.S. organizations of all types </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>to serve as a working tool for understanding and managing performance and for guiding organizational planning and opportunities for learning </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Education Criteria for Performance Excellence Goals The Criteria are designed to help organizations use an integrated approach to organizational performance management that results in </li></ul><ul><ul><li>delivery of ever-improving value to students and stakeholders, contributing to education quality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>improvement of overall organizational effectiveness and capabilities </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>organizational and personal learning </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. The Baldrige System <ul><li>Seven broad categories make up the criteria: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>leadership, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>strategic planning, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>customer and market focus, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>information and analysis, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>human resource focus, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>process management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>business results </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Baldrige Support System Elements <ul><li>The Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence </li></ul><ul><ul><li>provides a systems perspective for understanding performance management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>http://baldrige.nist.gov/Education_Criteria.htm </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Are We Making Progress? Survey </li></ul><ul><ul><li>designed to help you know if your perceptions agree with those of your employees </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>http://baldrige.nist.gov/PDF_files/Progress.pdf </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Survey Results from 2002 Examiner Training </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Approximately 200 Examiners voluntarily filled out the “Are We Making Progress?” survey during their May 2002 training sessions -- use it for benchmarking </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>http://baldrige.nist.gov/PDF_files/Examiner_Survey_Results.pdf </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. <ul><li>New Baldrige criteria for educational institutions </li></ul><ul><li>http://baldrige.nist.gov/Education_Criteria.htm </li></ul>
  10. 11. <ul><li>Areas of performance monitoring and scoring system </li></ul>
  11. 13. The Accreditation Process <ul><li>Educational institutions have accreditation responsibilities </li></ul><ul><ul><li>University level – e.g. SACS </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Professional/school level – e.g. ABET for engineering or AACSB for business </li></ul></ul><ul><li>These are narrowly focused on dimension of educational quality </li></ul><ul><li>They are concerned with organizational efficiency only peripherally </li></ul>
  12. 14. AACSB Accreditation <ul><li>AACSB is the premier global accrediting body for business schools </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Based on the American business school </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Over 1500 business schools world-wide </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>454 are AACSB accredited </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Extensive criteria </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>http://www.aacsb.edu/accreditation/standards.asp </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Requires periodic peer review with visits </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New criteria coming out – continuous review </li></ul></ul>
  13. 15. Sample AACSB Standards
  14. 16. Using Baldrige <ul><li>Use Baldrige as platform for managing the educational process with quality and achieve high performance while fulfilling accreditation obligations </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Accreditation was a subset of Baldrige </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Baldrige was a more robust platform than other performance management scoring systems – e.g. balanced scorecard </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Had survey instruments with benchmark data, used a systems approach, was more comprehensive, matched accreditation </li></ul></ul>
  15. 17. GMU School of Management <ul><li>George Mason University is a large public state university in Northern Virginia </li></ul><ul><ul><li>27,000 students, 3 campuses (Fairfax, Arl., PWC) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>SOM is the business school </li></ul><ul><ul><li>3500 undergraduates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>400 graduate students in the MBA, EMBA, MSTM, MSBM programs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>80 faculty, 50 staff </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>$12M per year budget </li></ul></ul>
  16. 18. SOM as a Case Study <ul><li>Why we implemented Baldrige </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Wanted a scoring system to check status </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wanted a system for managing all aspects of the school </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wanted to fulfill AACSB obligations – including new continuous improvement requirement– without extra work </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wanted to improve the school! </li></ul></ul>
  17. 19. How We Implemented Baldrige <ul><li>Made commitment to use Baldrige for managing – conscious decision not to try for award </li></ul><ul><li>Sorted Baldrige extensive list of performance monitoring criteria into three categories: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A-items those that matched AASCB criteria </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>B-items Baldrige items needed for managing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>C-items the rest of Baldrige not to be implemented </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Found that A and B-items made up only 50% </li></ul>
  18. 20. How We Implemented Baldrige <ul><li>Matched AACSB items to Baldrige items </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Many AACSB and Baldrige items were the same or similar—which gave us the impetus to implement Baldrige </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Wanted to make sure all AACSB criteria were being monitored and considered </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Have an obligation to monitor and improve educational performance </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Created a map between the two to make sure no AACSB items were ignored </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assisted in documentation </li></ul></ul>
  19. 21. Matching AACSB to Baldrige             5. Financial Strategies X X         4. Continuous Improvement Objectives             3. Student Mission           X 2. Mission Appropriateness   X   X   X 1. Mission Statement Strategic Management Standards 2.2 Strategy Deployment 2.1 Strategy Development 1.2 Social Responsibility 1.1 Organizational Leadership P.2 Organizational Challenges P.1 Organizational Description 2: Strategic Planning 1: Leadership P: Organizational Profile
  20. 22. Documentation <ul><li>We immediately started the documentation process </li></ul><ul><li>Many of these documents already existed </li></ul><ul><li>Created an electronic collection point </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Website indexed via AACSB and Baldrige </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accessible to all managers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The MIS system </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Basis for managing the organization </li></ul>
  21. 23. Performance Improvement <ul><li>Started the performance improvement process </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Getting started survey </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>“ Are We Making Progress” survey </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Summarized and examined results in strategic planning meetings and subsequent tactical senior staff meetings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Used survey results from 1400 Baldrige examiners as baseline data to compare </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Resolve any problems using performance improvement techniques (e.g. Six Sigma) </li></ul></ul>
  22. 24. Surveyed Faculty and Staff
  23. 26. Use of Survey <ul><li>Repeat use of survey yearly </li></ul><ul><li>Prepare for senior staff strategic planning sessions </li></ul><ul><li>Build base of baseline data </li></ul>
  24. 27. Use Baldrige For Radical Improvements <ul><li>Baldrige has extensive scoring criteria for each of the seven areas </li></ul><ul><li>Examine areas of particular concern in detail using gathered documentation </li></ul><ul><li>Use these criteria to go deeper into identifying problems </li></ul><ul><li>Solve problems using known performance improvement techniques (e.g. Six Sigma) </li></ul>
  25. 28. <ul><li>Scoring guidelines for approach development criteria </li></ul>
  26. 29. <ul><li>Scoring guidelines for results oriented criteria </li></ul>
  27. 31. Summary <ul><li>The Baldrige Quality Program may be used to manage an educational institution better </li></ul><ul><li>Some work is needed to align the extensive system to fit organizational characteristics </li></ul><ul><li>It may also be aligned with institution’s accreditation requirements </li></ul>