grayson presentation
Post on 12-Jan-2015
313 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
American Productivity & Quality Center
C. Jackson Grayson, Jr.
Chairman & CEO
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Sample of APQC Members• Allstate Ins. Company• America Online• Anadarko Petroleum• Aramco Services• Baker Hughes• Bank of America• BP Amoco • British Telecom• Carrollton-Farmers ISD • Cemex• CenterPoint Energy• Clark County Schools • J. P. Morgan Chase • Citigroup Inc.• Cobb County Schools• ConocoPhillips
• Cornell University• Dallas ISD• Dow Chemical• Educational Testing Service• Entergy• Exxon Chemical• Federal Express• Ford Motor• General Electric• General Motors• Hallmark Cards• Houston Comm. College• Halliburton Energy• Hewlett-Packard• Houston IS.• IBM Corporation• Intel Corp.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Johnson & Johnson• Kellogg• Lockheed Martin• Marathon Oil• Metro Technology Centers• Miami-Dade Co. Schools• Microsoft• Montgomery Co. Schools• National Security Agency• NASA• NEC• Nortel• Occidental Petroleum• Pfizer• Raytheon• Redstone Properties• SchoolCity Inc.
• Schlumberger• Siemens Medical Systems• Singapore Productivity Ctr.• Spring Branch ISD• Sprint• Tata Iron & Steel Co.• Texaco• Texas Children’s Hospital• 3 M Company• United Parcel Service, Inc.• U.S. Government Agencies• University of California• UT MDAndersonCancer Ctr.• Unocal• Washington Mutual• World Bank Group• Xerox
Sample of APQC Members
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Levels of evidence to link inputs and processes to educational outcomes
• Expert opinion, anecdotes, case studies• Correlation (but causation?)• Trial and error; Design of Experiments• Hypotheses testing; Value added • Multi Factorial Analysis—OFAT, Full,
Fractional • Bayesian analysis; probabilities; utility risk
preferences• ANOVA ; Gold standard
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Measurement and Improvement
• Don’t focus only on measuring the value of education technology
• Focus just as much on improving the value of education technology
• For that you need to focus on the end-to-end processes of designing and delivering education technology
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
4 Recommendations
1. Create more of a “Process Focus” in seeking to measure value in education technology.
2. Move your organizations more toward “Total Process Management.”
3. Conduct Professional Development on “Processes” and “Statistics” at all levels.
4. What can you do on Monday morning?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
1. Move toward a total process focus in measuring value
Involve all persons who are providers and customers of technology for educational improvement
Hardware and software staff, teachers, principals, students, suppliers, facilities
Draw a process map of the entire end-to-end process and form a process team.
Measure that process against outcomes
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Use measures like cost effectiveness, cycle time,
staff productivity, and process efficiency
Measure the process not the technology alone
Compare process measures with outcomes
Create Process Owners that cross functions with
staff, dollars, time, authority, and responsibility
Align process with district, state, and federal system
goals
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Most education organizations have
reams of data organized around
functions, programs, grants or
governmental data requirements.
• But few education organizations have
much data organized, managed,
mapped, or measured in terms of
“processes” (incl. educ. Technology)
A problem is…
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
The “missing link” in education improvement is a greater focus on processes.
• But most educators do not think “processes”.
• They do not map, or measure processes.
• They do not analyze or benchmark processes.
• They don’t link inputs—processes—outcomes.
• They focus functionally, not cross-functionally
• They don’t organize for process management
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
PIIE
Process Improvement & Implementation in
Education
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Participating School Districts
1. Aldine ISD - TX 55,000
2. Anne Arundel - MD 75,000
3. Boston Schools 60,000
4. Brazosport ISD- TX 14,000
5. Broward County 268,000
6. Carrollton FB - TX 26,000
7. Clark County – NV 257,000
8. Cobb County - GA 100,000
9. Fairfax County – VA 163,000
10.Galena Park ISD – TX 20,000
11.Galveston ISD – TX 10,000
12.Gwinnett County - GA 123,000
13. Houston ISD – TX 212,000
14. Lake Washington – WA 24,000
15. Long Beach – CA 97,000
16. Los Angeles – CA 747,000
17. Miami–Dade - FL 374,000
18. Montgomery Cty – MD 139,000
19. Philadelphia City – PA 193,000
20. Pinellas County – FL 115,000
21. Pittsburgh Schools 34,000
22. Santa Cruz Cty PS – CA 14,000
23. Wake County - NC 105,000
Total Students: 3,225,000
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
How It Worked• APQC created a year-long pilot: 2005
• To obtain and analyze process data from these 23 districts.
• These districts selected three processes:
− Assessing Student Achievement
− Managing Information Technology
− Finding and Hiring Teachers
• Surveys were designed to collect process data—about 80 questions per survey.
• Districts sent completed surveys to APQC who validated and normalized the data
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
APQC Process Classification Framework for EducationO
PE
RA
TIN
G P
RO
CE
SS
ES
1.0
Develop a Strategic Plan for
the District
2.0
Design, Deliver and
Assess Instruction
3.0
Design and Deliver Support
Services
4.0
Design and Manage
Operations
5.0
Develop and Manage
Stakeholder Relations
and Services
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
& S
UP
PO
RT
SE
RV
ICE
S
6.0 Develop and Manage Human Resources
7.0 Manage Information Technology
12.0 Manage Knowledge, Improvement, and Change
11.0 Manage Intergovernmental and Agency Relationships
10.0 Manage Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) and Security
9.0 Acquire, Construct and Manage Facilities and Property
8.0 Manage Financial Resources
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
7.1 Manage the business of IT 7.2 Develop and manage customer relationships 7.3 Manage business resiliency and risk 7.4 Manage enterprise information 7.5 Develop and maintain IT solutions 7.6 Deploy IT solutions 7.7 Deliver and support IT services 7.8 Manage IT knowledge
IT Process Groups in PCF
* APQC Process Classification Framework* APQC Process Classification Framework* 8 Process Groups; 35 Processes; 60 Activities* 8 Process Groups; 35 Processes; 60 Activities
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Process and outcomes data were analyzed in terms of 4 key metrics:– Cost effectiveness– Cycle time– Process Efficiency– Staff Productivity
• Individual customized Reports were sent back to each district
• Giving them measures of their own performance, and also compared to all the other districts.
How It Worked
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Benefits to Districts
Districts can compare their processes with other districts in terms of:– Cost Effectiveness, Staff Productivity– Cycle Time and Process Efficiency
For some processes, they can compare their metrics with business and other sectors
Funds & time are spent on improvement of key processes, and not searching for comparisons
Causes cross-functional process analysis
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Benefits to Districts
Offers data to drastically reduce non-value-added time and cost: “waste”
Allows apple-to-apple comparisons because of the common taxonomy
Savings can be re-allocated to instruction
Provides the basis for moving from function to process and systems management
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
2.To improve the value of education technology to improve education outcomes, move toward---
“Total Process Management.”
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Mktg. IT
Functional System--Vertical
SalesProduct-ion.
Engine-ringR&D
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Functional System with cross-functional processes
Process Process
Process
Process
Process
Process
Instruction
Process Process
Process Process
Process
Process
Process Process
Process Process
Process
Process
Process
Information Technology
Human Resources
Process Process
Process Process
Process
Process
Process
Food Service
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Leadership
Instructional Design
Instructional Delivery
Grade Reporting
Instructional Support
Curriculum Mgmt
Staff Development
Info. Technology
Instructional Assessment
Pro
cess
Man
agem
ent
Functional Management
Fo
od
Ser
vice
Tra
ns
po
rta
tio
n
Fin
an
cia
l A
cc
ou
nti
ng
Mai
nte
nan
ce
Hu
ma
n
Res
ou
rces
Pu
bli
c In
form
atio
n
Str
ate
gic
P
lan
nin
g
Cu
rric
ulu
m &
In
stru
ctio
n
Process and
Outcomes
Focused
A MatrixOrganization
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Adapted from: BPM Trends; 9/05
Knowledge ManagementQuality Tools
Baldrige, Deming, TQM
• Lean
• Six Sigma
Information
Technology
Process Data,
Measures &
MetricsBenchmarking
Total Process Management
Process Owners
Core BPM Team• Process
Improvement
• Process Innovation
• Efficiency
• Effectiveness
Change
ManagementImplementation
Total Process Management
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Transformative gains
• Incremental process improvements of 2% to 10% is helpful. Do them.
• But It will no longer be sufficient.
• Education needs transformative process gains of 10% to 50% each year, or even higher, in key processes.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Gains with levels of process management
Used with permission from Six Sigma Academy
1-2 % Cost focus
2 -10 %
10-20%
20-50%
Process Innovation
Process management
Process Improvement
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
3. Conduct Professional Development on “Processes” and “Statistics” at all levels
Descriptive statistics– mean, median,
mode, measures of dispersion, charting
Probabilities—Poisson, Normal
Inferential statistics —sampling,
confidence intervals, correlations,
causal linkages, hypotheses testing,
Type I and II errors, ANOVA
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Data alone does not drive improvement
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Use business tools focusing on process improvement and value creation
Six Sigma, Shared Services, Supply Chain Non-value-added analysis (NVA), Lean Process Management; Process Mapping Benchmarking, Communities of Practice Knowledge Management; Tacit Knowledge Work-Out and Change Acceleration Process Systems thinking; Baldrige; Productivity Transfer of Best Practices; Customer Focus;
NOAC
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
4. What do I Do Monday Morning?
Contact all persons involved in designing and delivering educational technology--identify needs, values, problems, opportunities
Define the process boundaries—start and stop Select a specific project; Form a process team Designate a process owner: resources, staff,
authority, responsibilities Map and measure process: “as-is” “should
be”—including all cross functions
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Collect and analyze data—flag problems, brainstorm root causes, look for non-value-added time and cost.
Benchmark the process—inside & outside
Decide on action plan and implement—with roles, timetables, measures, metrics, incentives
Implement and continuously improve
4. What do I Do Monday Morning?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Your Personal Improvement?
Exercise Often
Embrace Laughter
Eat well
Love Much
Be Glad You Are Alive
Wear Sunscreen
Floss frequently
Fill Out A Survey
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
What is it you wish to change?
Costs—Lower or Higher? Student achievement? Test scores? Teacher retention? Hiring? Meet AYP goals? Decrease the dropout rate? Close your achievement gap? Improve food services? Improve on-time bus delivery?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Advantages of Process Data
Compare themselves with others See performance gaps that need
improvement Establish performance targets Improve the budget process and re-allocate
resources Identify key performance drivers Help initiate improvement steps
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
How PIIE Works
• Surveys were designed to collect data
• As surveys come in, APQC staff
stores the data in a repository.
• Data are then:
• Analyzed, validated, normalized
• Blinded, so data are kept totally
confidential
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Potential SavingsStatistical summary of participant compared to top
performer per new hire
How much can we save by improving our HR recruiting processes?
Top Performance
$534
Average Performance
$752
Bottom Performance
$946
Your Performance
$859
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
PIIE Methodology: A 12-Step Process
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Data
• Payroll
• Facilities
• Equipment
• Finance
Inputs
Process
Indicators
Efficiency Effectiveness
Improvement System
• Outcomes
• Indicators
Accountability System
Data Data
Improvement & Accountability Systems
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Process Improvement and Innovation in Education
This lead to the creation of
PIIE
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Participating School Districts
1. Aldine ISD - TX 55,000
2. Anne Arundel - MD 75,000
3. Boston Schools 60,000
4. Brazosport ISD- TX 14,000
5. Broward County 268,000
6. Carrollton FB - TX 26,000
7. Clark County – NV 257,000
8. Cobb County - GA 100,000
9. Fairfax County – VA 163,000
10.Galena Park ISD – TX 20,000
11.Galveston ISD – TX 10,000
12.Gwinnett County - GA 123,000
13. Houston ISD – TX 212,000
14. Lake Washington – WA 24,000
15. Long Beach – CA 97,000
16. Los Angeles – CA 747,00
17. Miami–Dade - FL 374,000
18. Montgomery Cty – MD 139,000
19. Philadelphia City – PA 193,000
20. Pinellas County – FL 112,000
21. Pittsburgh Schools 34,000
22. Santa Cruz Cty PS – CA 14,000
23. Wake County - NC 105,000
Total Students: 3,225,000
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
American Productivity & Quality Center--APQC
Founded in 1977 with $10 million from 100 corporations
Non-profit, 501(c)(3) organization Annual revenues $11 million and staff of 85
Membership and Fees for Service Research, publications, training Conferences, technical services
Business, government, healthcare, education Domestic and International
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Sample of APQC Members
• Allstate Ins. Company• America Online• Anadarko Petroleum• Aramco Services• Baker Hughes• Bank of America• BP Amoco • British Telecom• Cemex• CenterPoint Energy• Clark County Schools • J. P. Morgan Chase • Citigroup Inc.• Cobb County Schools• ConocoPhillips• Cornell University
• Dallas ISD• Dow Chemical• Entergy• Exxon Chemical• Federal Express• Ford Motor• General Electric• General Motors• Hallmark Cards• Houston Comm. College• Halliburton Energy• Hewlett-Packard• Houston I.S.D.• IBM Corporation• Intel Corp.• Johnson & Johnson
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Kellogg• Lockheed Martin• Marathon Oil• Miami-Dade Co. Public Sch.• Microsoft• Montgomery Co. Schools• National Security Agency• NASA• NEC• Nortel• Occidental Petroleum• Pfizer• Raytheon• Redstone Properties• Schlumberger• Siemens Medical Systems
• Singapore Productivity Ctr.• Spring Branch ISD• Sprint• Tata Iron & Steel Co.• Texaco• Texas Children’s Hospital• 3 M Company• United Parcel Service, Inc.• U.S. Government Agencies• University of California• UT MDAndersonCancer Ctr.• Unocal• Washington Mutual• World Bank Group• Xerox
Sample of APQC Members
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
The Quiet Crisis
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
1. Hong Kong / China 1. Finland 1. Finland 1. Korea
2. Finland 2. Korea 2. Japan 2. Hong Kong / China
3. Korea 3. Canada 3. Hong Kong / China
3. Finland
4. Netherlands 9. Netherlands 4. Korea 4. Japan
6. Japan 10. Hong Kong / China
8. Netherlands 9. Canada
7. Canada 14. Japan 11. Canada 12. Netherlands
19. Germany 18. Germany 16. Germany
21. Canada 28. Russia
29. Russia 32. Russia 24. Russia
37. Mexico 37. Brazil 37. Mexico 37. Mexico
40. Brazil 38. Mexico 39. Brazil 38. Brazil
International Comparisons of American StudentsInternational Comparisons of American Students
MathematicsMathematics ReadingReading ScienceScience Problem Problem SolvingSolving
28. United States28. United States
18. United States18. United States
22. United States22. United States
29. United States29. United States
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Secretary Spelling: 9/21/05Secretary Spelling: 9/21/05
“There is no Sputnik to galvanize the
nation into action….
“…the quiet crisis will cast a very long
shadow over the future if we do not
summon the will to stay competitive.
”And competitiveness begins with
education”
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
“We improve our business systems or lose our world competitiveness.”
C. Jackson Grayson, Jr.
An ad in New York Times and Wall Street Journal, sponsored by U. S. Steel
1975
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
“We improve our K-12 education system or lose our world
competitiveness.”
2005
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Needed:A Process Focus in Business and
Education
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Improvement Model
“Steering by Inputs, Processes & Outcomes”
• Payroll
• Expenses
• Equipment
• Facilities
Inputs
Data
• Test Results
• Achievement Gap
• Graduation Rates
• Dropouts
Outcomes
Data
A Black Box Processes
Data
• Assess Student Achievement
• Recruit Teachers
• Manage Info. Technology
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Process Management
• Education can continue to make small gains doing what they are doing now.
• But until more focus on process occurs…
• Education improvement at best will be incremental, gradual, and slow
• It will not be transformative—which is what is required.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
“We’re not there yet”
. The major focus for improvement is still on inputs, outcomes, and functions.
Not processes or process mgmt.
• In all of education—schools, districts,
states, federal gov’t, or universities • In many businesses• In much of TCO and TVO
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Processes
• There’s no shortage of data! Most organizations—business and education-- have reams of data in their databases or warehouses.
• But few have much data organized, mapped, or measured in terms of “processes”
• Processes are typically:
• Not mapped, not measured
• Not cross-functional
• Not managed; full of non-value-added time
• Sub-optimized because of a functional focus
.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Admini-stration IT
Most are organized and managed by functions
Transpor-tation
Finance-Acctg.
Food Service
Instruc-tion
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Functional Organizations don’t deal efficiently or effectively with cross functions
Food Service
Admini-stration IT
Transpor-tation
Finance-Acctg.
Instruc-tion
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Redundant checking; re-checking
• Repeated meetings and phone calls for coordination
• Queuing time; paper moving time
• Slow response to customers—internal and external
• Excessive “transition” time
There is a lot of non-value-added time in education-- “unseen” waste
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Unrecorded non-value-added time
• Checking and rechecking
• Waiting time between functions
• Culture clashes
• Unnecessary red tape
• Unread documents / memos
• Long chains of approval & command
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Visible Costs
Costs Not
Picked Up
By your Accounting
System
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Three years ago, APQC started the Open Standards Benchmarking Collaborative--OSBC
• The purpose: a global initiative to develop a standard for commonly used processes, measures, and benchmarks.
• Hundreds of U.S. & global firms participate:• IBM Consulting Services, Booz Allen Hamilton,
Shell Oil, Gartner, Bank of America, Procter & Gamble, World Bank, and more
• OSBC strives to enable rapid and innovative improvement within business organizations:
40% Americas, 40% EMEA, and 20% Pacific Rim.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
OSBC Supply Chain
• Procurement
• Logistics
• Customer Order Management
• Manufacturing
• New Product Development
• Supply Chain Planning
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
OSBC Finance & Accounting
• Account Payable / Expenses
• Finance Organization
• Fixed Asset
• General Accounting & Reporting
• Internal Controls
• Order-to-Cash ; Payroll
• Profit & Cost Management
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
OSBC Human Resources
• Create and Manage HR Planning, Policy, and Strategies
• Develop and Counsel (includes training)
• Manage Employee Information
• Recruit, Source and Select
• Redeploy and Retire
• Reward and Retain
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Participating School Districts
1. Aldine ISD - TX 55,000
2. Anne Arundel - MD 75,000
3. Boston Schools 60,000
4. Brazosport ISD- TX 14,000
5. Broward County 268,000
6. Carrollton FB - TX 26,000
7. Clark County – NV 257,000
8. Cobb County - GA 100,000
9. Fairfax County – VA 163,000
10.Galena Park ISD – TX 20,000
11.Galveston ISD – TX 10,000
12.Gwinnett County - GA 123,000
13. Houston ISD – TX 212,000
14. Lake Washington – WA 24,000
15. Long Beach – CA 97,000
16. Los Angeles – CA 747,000
17. Miami–Dade - FL 374,000
18. Montgomery Cty – MD 139,000
19. Philadelphia City – PA 193,000
20. Pinellas County – FL 115,000
21. Pittsburgh Schools 34,000
22. Santa Cruz Cty PS – CA 14,000
23. Wake County - NC 105,000
Total Students: 3,225,000
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Since outcomes can’t be changed without changes in processes that produce outcomes
The “missing link” in education improvement is a greater focus on processes.
• But most educators do not think “processes”.
• They do not map, or measure processes.
• They do not analyze or benchmark processes.
• They don’t link inputs—processes—outcomes.
• They focus functionally, not cross-functionally
• They don’t organize for process management
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Instead of only an OSBC
for Business
Why Not Do the Same Thing
In Education?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Process Improvement and Innovation in Education
This lead to the creation of
PIIE
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Improvement commonly means improvement in existing processes in a particular function.
Innovation means a radical re-design of work, most often cross-functional–
Improvement and Innovation
“What is the best possible way to do it, regardless of our
present work processes and organization structure?”
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
23 Districts were invited to participate in the OSBC-E for a year-long pilot
A subset of those districts came to APQC on Dec. 13-14 to begin the “design” process
A Kickoff Meeting was held on Jan. 6-7 at APQC with all districts—80 attended
3 Process areas were selected for the pilot and “Working Groups” were formed:
InstructionHuman ResourcesInformation Technology
The Pilot
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
PIIE Methodology: A 12-Step Process
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
APQC Process Classification Framework for EducationO
PE
RA
TIN
G P
RO
CE
SS
ES
1.0
Develop a Strategic Plan for
the District
2.0
Design, Deliver and
Assess Instruction
3.0
Design and Deliver Support
Services
4.0
Design and Manage
Operations
5.0
Develop and Manage
Stakeholder Relations
and Services
MA
NA
GE
ME
NT
& S
UP
PO
RT
SE
RV
ICE
S
6.0 Develop and Manage Human Resources
7.0 Manage Information Technology
12.0 Manage Knowledge, Improvement, and Change
11.0 Manage Intergovernmental and Agency Relationships
10.0 Manage Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) and Security
9.0 Acquire, Construct and Manage Facilities and Property
8.0 Manage Financial Resources
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Efficiency
• Effectiveness
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Education Process Management
Adapted from: BPM Trends; 9/05
Knowledge ManagementQuality Tools
Baldrige, Deming, TQM
• Lean
• Six Sigma
Information
Technology
Process Data,
Measures &
MetricsBenchmarking
Education Process
Management
Process Owners
Core BPM Team• Process
Improvement
• Process Innovation
• Efficiency
• Effectiveness
Change
ManagementImplementation
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
K-12 As a SystemAll subsystems should
work together as a system
None should exist on their own
They should be linked, aligned,
intertwined
Have a common vision and work
together
The problem is that they often aren’t a “system”
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Decisions are not doing Blaming is not doing Meetings are not doing Talking about doing is not doing
Doing is taking action…..Doing is taking action….. Doing somethingDoing something
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
“My Plate Is Full”
“But, full of what?”
Non-ValueNon-Value
AddedAdded
Activities?Activities?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Reduce “Waste”
• “Non-Value-Added” time and costs
• Also, known as “Lean”
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Visible Costs
Costs Not
Picked Up
By your Accounting
System
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
“The largest and easiest gains in
knowledge work come from re-
defining the task and eliminating
what need not be done.” (Waste)
Drucker, 1992
Managing the Future: The 1990s and Beyond
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Communities of Practice
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Processes Outcomes
Outcomes cannot be changed without changes in processes!!
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Located in Houston; Non-profit 501(c)(3)
• 30 years old
• Staff: 85; Budget $12 million
• Revenues: Membership: 30%, Fees 70%
• Worked in 54 nations; 6 continents
• Board of Directors: 40 National Leaders
• Mission: Improve productivity and quality in all organizations www.apqc.org
APQC: American Productivity & Quality Center
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Sample of APQC Members
• Allstate Ins. Company• America Online• Anadarko Petroleum• Aramco Services• Baker Hughes• Bank of America• BP Amoco • British Telecom• Carrollton-Farmers Branch • Cemex• CenterPoint Energy• Clark County Schools • J. P. Morgan Chase • Citigroup Inc.• Cobb County Schools• ConocoPhillips
• Cornell University• Dallas ISD• Dow Chemical• Educational Testing Service• Entergy• Exxon Chemical• Federal Express• Ford Motor• General Electric• General Motors• Hallmark Cards• Houston Comm. College• Halliburton Energy• Hewlett-Packard• Houston I.S.D.• IBM Corporation• Intel Corp.
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
• Johnson & Johnson• Kellogg• Lockheed Martin• Marathon Oil• Metro Technology Centers• Miami-Dade Co. Schools• Microsoft• Montgomery Co. Schools• National Security Agency• NASA• NEC• Nortel• Occidental Petroleum• Pfizer• Raytheon• Redstone Properties• SchoolCity Inc.
• Schlumberger• Siemens Medical Systems• Singapore Productivity Ctr.• Spring Branch ISD• Sprint• Tata Iron & Steel Co.• Texaco• Texas Children’s Hospital• 3 M Company• United Parcel Service, Inc.• U.S. Government Agencies• University of California• UT MDAndersonCancer Ctr.• Unocal• Washington Mutual• World Bank Group• Xerox
Sample of APQC Members
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
SixSigma
Metrics
1977Productivity: Competitiveness
1983Quality (Baldrige Award)
1991Benchmarking
1994Transfer of Best Practices
1995Knowledge Management
1996Knowledge Sharing-CoP
1999Education
2004OSBC—Bus.
2005PIIE
Process Evolution at APQC
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Benchmarking to find best practices Knowledge Management; Knowledge
Sharing, Knowledge Retention Communities of Practice Quality/Baldrige, Productivity, Six Sigma Research; Publications; Conferences Training — public and on-site Technical assistance
APQC Products & Services
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Business & EducationProcess
Management
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Reminders about Measures
What is done with measures is as important as what your measures are
Get the customers in your measures Measure trends, not just snapshots Any process, job, group, department,
organization can be measured You change what you measure
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
What makes a good measure?
1. Are you sure about what you want to measure?
2. Must a single measure be used or could a combination of measures be developed?
3. Is the purpose to measure level, trend or percent of some standard?
4. Should inputs other than labor and time be considered?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Reminders about Measures
Focus on the vital few – measure only what matters and what you can do something as a result of having the measure in place
Use measures as a tool, not just for analysis, but for effective management
Link measurements to performance evaluation of teams, individuals, entities
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Reminders about Measures
What is done with measures is as important as what your measures are
Get the customers in your measures Measure trends, not just snapshots Any process, job, group, department,
organization can be measured You change what you measure
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
What makes a good measure?
1. Are you sure about what you want to measure?
2. Must a single measure be used or could a combination of measures be developed?
3. Is the purpose to measure level, trend or percent of some standard?
4. Should inputs other than labor and time be considered?
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
Reminders about Measures
Focus on the vital few – measure only what matters and what you can do something as a result of having the measure in place
Use measures as a tool, not just for analysis, but for effective management
Link measurements to performance evaluation of teams, individuals, entities
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final
top related