ALTERNATIVES TO USING THE BALDRIGE AWARD APPLICATION
Kodak created two alternatives to help reduce the amount of time it would take to complete its assessments. in 1997, the self-assessment using the Kodak Quality System Review and the Baldrige team assessment focused on anything related to customers.
Kodak quality system:
- In 1997, the self-assessment using the Kodak Quality System Review and the Baldrige team assessment focused on anything related to customers.
- Each senior leader at Kodak has identified actions and goals that are important to his or her business unit.
- These goals and actions are captured in the Management Performance Commitment Plan (MPCP), which ties significant portions of leaders' take-home pay to customer satisfaction (30%), employee satisfaction (30%), and shareholder results (40%).
- Results are reviewed quarterly.
Kodak self-assessment matrix:
- The matrix allows you to arrive at a Baldrige-like score in eight hours," says Vorhauer.
- "If you multiply that by the number of executives who perform the assessment, you Ve got 80 to 100 hours for an assessment—significantly less than a full application—and you also get a way to improve."
- As it developed the matrix, Kodak had units write applications and complete the self-assessment, then compared the scores.
- It found a strong correlation between the matrix and application scores, suggesting that the scoring aspect of the self-assessment matrix would give units an accurate picture of their systems and of the areas that needed to be improved.
The matrix describes ten "ranks" for each of the seven Baldrige categories (based on the 1991 criteria). Each member of the assessment team, which is usually a unit's management team, scores every cell in the matrix, using the following codes:
Deployed (D): The unit has fully applied the characteristics described in the cell.
Partially deployed (P): The characteristics have been applied only to majör areas within the unit.
Not deployed (N): Application of the characteristics is minimal or anecdotal.
The ratings should be verifiable through available data. After each assessment team member has scored ali 70 cells, the team meets to arrive at a consensus score for each cell and for the unit as a whole.