Common assessment framework что это
Модель CAF получена из Модель совершенства EFQM и соответствует тем же 9 критериям.
Содержание
CAF: Common Assessment Framework. Quality Model for Public Sector
Master in ARCHaeological MATerials Science - ARCHMAT
Recommendations
Développement local et valorisation du patrimoine culturel fragile : le rôle médiateur des ONG : cas.
Le concept de « patrimoine culturel » intègre notre champ de recherche en sciences de l’information et de la communication reliant sa mise en valeur et sa protection à la médiation territoriale. Dans une vision de développement local, le patrimoine culturel naturel, matériel et immatériel, constitue un atout économique et touristique. Notre thèse étudie la mise en valeur patrimoine culturel dans . [Show full abstract] les régions et zones rurales du Sud-tunisien. Il s’agit de traiter une problématique traduisant les soucis d’une population locale en termes de sauvegarde de son héritage patrimonial contre les formes de marginalisation et l’oubli. Les familles rurales souhaitent développer leur production locale fondée sur les ressources patrimoniales, les fabrications de produits du terroir et l’artisanat mais rencontrent des difficultés financières et institutionnelles pour soutenir leurs activités locales. Cela est dû à une absence de communication entre la population et les instances publiques pour collaborer autour de la problématique de la valorisation du patrimoine qui devient de plus en plus fragile. Notre thèse est d’avancer un élément central de soutien institutionnel pour médiatiser le dialogue entre les acteurs locaux. Il s’agit d’introduire les organisations non gouvernementales (O.N.G.) comme acteur de médiation pour renforcer des actions de concertation et impliquer encore plus les institutions publiques et la population locale dans la question de la valorisation du patrimoine culturel. Une recherche-action a été mise en œuvre pour explorer un nouveau terrain d’investigation, et comprendre les rôles et les responsabilités des acteurs réunis sur un territoire.
Discontinuous change in the New Zealand police service – A case study
In a country that has experienced over 15 years of politically driven change, the New Zealand Police Service (NZP) is now in the midst of an ambitious change programme called Policing 2000 (P2). Challenging traditional policing assumptions, P2 is a total quality management (TQM) approach that seeks alignment with an increasingly service orientated public by utilising state-of-the-art technology . [Show full abstract] and strategic management practices more akin to the private sector. Reports on an exploratory case study that investigated individual anticipatory reactions to organisational change. The findings provide insights into the factors necessary for the implementation of a discontinuous change programme; namely alignment of vision, culture and implementation.
Ключевые слова: государственное управление, модель CAF, самооценка, менеджмент качества, оценка эффективности
Аннотация
Статья продолжает серию публикаций о модели Common Assessment Framework, или CAF, — европейской системе самооценки для организаций государственного сектора. В работе рассмотрены принципы проведения самооценки по CAF, методика приоритизации действий по улучшению, а также практический опыт европейских организаций по совершенствованию деятельности на основе результатов самооценки.
Библиографическая ссылка: печать / интернет
1. Нургатина Л.А., Стаес П., Тийес Н., Маслов Д.В. Модель CAF в сфере государственного управления в Европе // Стандарты и качество. — 2014. — №3. — С. 72–75.
2. Маслов Д.В., Короленко А.Ю., Смирнов В.В. Система оценки эффективности деятельности аппаратов органов государственной власти и местного самоуправления «Эффективная публичная служба» (ЭПУС). — М.: Флинта: Наука, 2006. — 50 с.
3. Maslov D. (2011). Common Assessment Framework Good Practice Book. Regional Centre for Public Administration Reform of UNDP Bratislava Regional Centre, 62 p.
4. Maslov D., Nurgatina L. (2014). Raising Effectiveness and Quality in Public Administration through Application of the European Common Assess-ment Framework (CAF model): Tatarstan Case. The 22nd NISPAcee Conference «From Pre-Weberianism to Neo-Weberianism?», May 22–24, Budapest, Hungary.
5. Маслов Д.В. CAF — совершенствование организаций публичного сектора через самооценку // Менеджмент качества. — 2015. — №1. — С. 18–27.
6. Маслов Д.В. Модель CAF — «Возможности» // Менеджмент качества. — 2015. — №2. — С. 130–147.
7. Маслов Д.В. Модель CAF — «Результаты» // Менеджмент качества. — 2015. — №3. — С. 212–220.
8. Общая схема оценки Common Assessment Framework (CAF). Совершенствование организаций публичного сектора через самооценку / Пер. с англ. под ред. Д.В. Маслова. — Казань: Издательство Казанского университета, 2013. — 68 с.
9. Staes P., Thijs N., Claessens D. (2016). CAF Improvement Identification, Prioritisation and Implementation. CAF Resource Centre European Insti-tute of Public Administration, EIPA, Maastricht, 250 p.
10. CAF Improvement Identification, Prioritisation and Implementation. Proceedings of the 7th European CAF Users’ Event. — Подробнее .
11. Развитие кадрового потенциала — один из приоритетов ЖКХ. — Подробнее .
12. Маслов Д.В., Нургатина Л.А. Развитие местного самоуправления через самооценку: модель CAF и индекс качества системы управления // Стандарты и качество. — 2015. — №7. — С. 66–69.
13. Фоссум С.Э., Маслов Д.В. Управление качеством в школьном образовании Норвегии // Стандарты и качество. — 2014. — №10. — С. 88–92.
Научный сотрудник Ивановского филиала РАНХиГС при Президенте РФ, председатель комитета по качеству в государственном и муниципальном управлении Всероссийской организации качества.
Ведущий лектор Ресурсного центра CAF, секретарь Фламандской ассоциации государственного управления, Европейский институт государственного управления (European Institute of Public Administration, EIPA).
Quality exists and can be defined according to the interest shown by those who refer to it or by those who are willing to make use of it (Morgan and Murgatroyd, 1994). There are, in fact, tools to measure quality and the CAF model used in this research work is living proof. Quality, being a factor of competitiveness, must be assessed continuously as this is the only way to establish the difference between organisations that promote quality and excellence and those that do not do so (Swiss, 1992; Rago, 1994; Kaboolian, 1999; Scharitzer and Kornda, 2000; Loffler, 2001). In general terms, the study undertaken reveals that the mission and vision of the University of Évora are acknowledged by all respondents; that the managers are receptive to change unlike the collaborators who tend to be a barrier to change. Moreover, it shows that there is
Presentation of the CAF model Source: DGAEP (2007) To undertake an accurate self-assessment by means of the CAF, one must take into consideration some phases of its planning, so that the value of the assessment may be optimized (DGAP, 2005), as Figure 2 shows.
Discover the world's research
- 20+ million members
- 135+ million publications
- 700k+ research projects
Is total quality management (TQM) useful for public sector organizations? James E. Swiss argues that the orthodox form of TQM expressed in the works of W. Edwards Deming and others will not work well in government agencies for a variety of reasons. Among other factors limiting the usefulness of orthodox TQM for public sector agencies is the stress on products rather than services, on well defined consumer groups, on inputs and processes rather than results, and on an organization culture with a single-minded preoccupation with quality. Swiss does, however, see more hope for a contribution if a limited "reform TQM" approach is adopted. Adopting major features of the more orthodox approach, reform TQM would emphasize client feedback, performance monitoring, continuous improvement, and worker participation.
Происхождение и эволюция
В 1998 году дискуссии между Генеральными директорами государственного управления государств-членов ЕС в Европейской сети государственного управления (EUPAN) показали, что существует потребность в общей европейской структуре качества, которую можно было бы использовать в государственном секторе в качестве инструмента. для самооценки организации. Вследствие этого было решено, что эта структура качества должна быть совместно разработана под эгидой Innovative Public Services Group (IPSG), неформальной рабочей группы национальных экспертов, созданной Генеральными директорами сети EUPAN. Первая версия CAF была разработана IPSG в 1998 и 1999 годах при поддержке Европейский фонд управления качеством (EFQM), Академия Шпейера (которая организовала Премию качества Шпейера для государственного сектора в немецкоязычных странах Европы) и Европейский институт государственного управления (EIPA). [3]
Модель CAF была представлена в 2000 году на 1-й Европейской конференции по качеству в Лиссабоне. Европейский ресурсный центр CAF был создан в 2001 году при EIPA в Маастрихте, чтобы служить в качестве экспертного центра по внедрению CAF, для обеспечения обучения и консультирования, для поддержки государств-членов в распространении CAF и дальнейшего развития модели. Первые два года CAF были оценены с помощью исследования использования CAF. Результаты привели к CAF 2002, улучшенной версии модели, которая была представлена на 2-й Европейской конференции по качеству в Дании. В 2005 году было проведено новое исследование использования CAF. Ряд областей CAF нуждались в дальнейшем улучшении: повышение согласованности и простоты модели, повышение удобства использования за счет улучшения примеров и глоссария, разработка более точной системы оценки для определенных пользователей и расширение подхода к качеству с помощью директивы по планам действий по улучшению и руководящие указания по стендовому обучению. CAF был усовершенствован во второй раз в 2006 году. Новый CAF 2006 был представлен на 4-й Европейской конференции по качеству в Финляндии. В 2009 и 2010 годах следовали процедуре внешней обратной связи по внедрению ОСО в организации и специальной версии ОСО для сектора образования. [2]
На сегодняшний день CAF 2006 является самой последней версией модели CAF. Новый пересмотр модели запланирован на 2012 год и будет основан на результатах исследования, проведенного в первой половине 2011 года. [2]
Год | Мероприятие |
---|---|
1998 | Соглашение о развитии CAF в сети EUPAN |
2000 | Запуск CAF |
2001 | Создание Европейского ресурсного центра CAF в EIPA (Европейский институт государственного управления) - Маастрихт |
2002 | Первая версия модели: запуск CAF 2002 |
2006 | Вторая версия модели: запуск CAF 2006 |
2009 | Запуск процедуры внешней обратной связи и метки эффективного пользователя CAF |
2010 | Запуск версии CAF и Education |
CAF преследует четыре основные цели: [1]
- Ознакомить органы государственного управления с принципами TQM и постепенно направлять их, используя и понимание самооценки, от текущей последовательности действий «Планируй-Сделай» к полноценной «Планирование-выполнение-проверка-действие (PDCA)" цикл;
- Содействовать самооценке общественной организации для постановки диагноза и действий по улучшению;
- Действовать как мост между различными моделями, используемыми в управлении качеством;
- Для облегчения обучения между организациями государственного сектора.
Industrial Wastewater Management Practices in Air Force Logistics Command
The selection of a model plant was based upon criteria established by a review of current literature. The criteria were permit compliance, plant performance, and the adoption of pollution prevention as a corporate environmental philosophy. In this study, private sector firms were examined to identify the best industrial wastewater management practices using a Total Quality Management (TQM) tool . [Show full abstract] called benchmarking. The data gathering process consisted a survey of water pollution control organizations, and a survey of benchmark candidates. The purpose of surveying water pollution control organizations was to objectively identify possible benchmark candidates. A questionnaire was then used to gather technical data on each benchmark candidate's performance.
Creating Community in a University Production of Bocon!
Rehearsing and ‘living through’ a play production provided opportunities for nine students to reflect on their lives as theatre artists. In a series of interviews, the students searched for what was in their educational programme to establish the kinds of community they desired. That vision focused on the themes of inclusion, collaboration and voice. The interrelated themes reflect attempts to . [Show full abstract] define organisational lives around shared ideals or ‘virtues’. While adhering to certain beliefs about how individuals should live in relation to each other is important, there are two other defining characteristics of the common ground that connects these students to each other. The basis for the creation of community is also advanced by a willingness to recognise individual identity and the interconnectedness among group members. Finally, finding common ground is associated with preserving a compact of affirmation, solidarity and critique.
MFAM: Management Functional Assessment Model: New Perspective on Organisational Self-Assessment
Management Functional Assessment Model is a new management tool to help you attain and/or maintain a sustainable competitive advantage via converting the energy of traditional functional management in your organisation to the energy of quality. You will open new horizons moving from vertical to horizontal decision making process and making new steps to excellence. The Management Functional Assessment (MFA) Model can be considered as a quality, excellence and change model. It is developed upon previous works including that of Frederick Taylor, Henri Fayol, Edwards Deming, Tito Conti, and self-assessment models of the Baldrige Excellence Framework and the EFQM Excellence Model. Being a TQM model, MFA is based upon six functions of management: forecasting and planning; organising; motivation; control; coordination ; and communication. Using the MFA Criteria for self-assessment you can enhance the quality of your management systems through continuous learning, innovation, and improvement. The MFA has been designed to aid managers in determining the key activities to be addressed in order to improve corporate efficiency and effectiveness within a framework of obtaining all stakeholder satisfaction including your employees. The MFA Methodology has been produced as a result of international cooperation between Russian, British and Australian researchers. . [more]
Структура модели CAF
Общая структура оценки основана на восьми принципах, «принципах превосходства». Вот эти восемь принципов: [4]
- Ориентация на результат
- Гражданин / Ориентация на клиента
- Лидерство и постоянство цели
- Управление процессами и фактами
- Вовлечение людей
- Постоянное совершенствование и инновации
- Взаимовыгодное партнерство
- Корпоративная социальная ответственность
CAF имеет девять критериев, представляющих основные аспекты, требующие рассмотрения при любом организационном анализе. Существует пять критериев реализации (лидерство, стратегия и планирование, люди, партнерства и ресурсы и процессы) и четыре критерия результатов (результаты, ориентированные на гражданина / клиента, результаты людей, результаты общества и ключевые результаты деятельности). [1] Факторы влияния охватывают то, что делает организация. Результаты охватывают то, чего достигает организация. Выполняя самооценку с CAF, организации государственного сектора могут найти области для улучшения функционирования организации и достижения желаемых результатов. [5]
CAF специально разработан для государственного сектора. Собственно говоря, именно эта направленность отличает CAF от Модель EFQM Excellence.
Государственное управление и качество в государственном секторе имеют ряд особых уникальных условий по сравнению с частным сектором. Они предполагают основные предпосылки, общие для нашей европейской социально-политической и административной культуры: легитимность (демократический парламент), верховенство закона и этическое поведение, основанное на общих ценностях и принципах, таких как открытость, подотчетность, участие, разнообразие, равенство, социальная справедливость, солидарность, сотрудничество и партнерство. [1]
9 критериев модели CAF подразделяются на 28 подкритериев. Эти подкритерии определяют основные вопросы, которые необходимо учитывать при оценке организации государственного сектора. Каждый подкритерий проиллюстрирован серией примеров, объясняющих его содержание. [1]
Ключевые слова: качество, совершенствование, государственное и муниципальное управление, публичный менеджмент, вовлечение персонала, управление человеческими ресурсами, организационная самооценка, CAF, KPI
Аннотация
В статье рассматривается европейская модель Common Assessment Framework (CAF) и возможности ее применения для проведения организационной самооценки и вовлечения работников в процессы совершенствования деятельности организаций публичного сектора с акцентом на сферу государственного и муниципального управления.
Библиографическая ссылка: печать / интернет
1. Маслов Д.В. Модель CAF для улучшения качества публичного менеджмента // Государственная служба. — 2009. — №6. — С. 67–69.
2. Маслов Д.В. От качества к совершенству. Полезная модель EFQM. — М.: РИА «Стандарты и качество», 2008. — 152 с.
3. Маслов Д.В., Короленко А.Ю., Смирнов В.В. Система «ЭПУС» как механизм повышения эффективности государственного и муници-пального управления // Государственная служба. — 2007. — №6. — С. 70–81.
4. Маслов Д.В., Короленко А.Ю., Смирнов В.В. Система оценки эффективности деятельности аппаратов органов государственной власти и местного самоуправления «Эффективная публичная служба» (ЭПУС). — М.: Флинта, Наука, 2006. — 50 с.
5. Нургатина Л.А., Стаес П., Тийес Н., Маслов Д.В. Модель CAF в сфере государственного управления в Европе // Стандарты и качество. — 2014. — №3. — С. 72–75.
6. Общая схема оценки Common Assessment Framework (CAF). Совершенствование организаций публичного сектора через самооценку / Пер. с англ. под ред. Д.В. Маслова, Л.А. Нургатиной. — Казань: Издательство Казанского университета, 2013. — 68 с.
7. Allen R., Lucero M., van Norman K. (1997). «An examination of the individual’s decision to participate in an employee involvement program». Group and Organization Management, No. 22, рр. 117–143.
8. CAF — Common Assessment Framework. — Подробнее .
9. CAF 2013. Improving Public Organisations through Self-Assessment (2012). Maastricht: European CAF Resource Centre. EIPA.
10. CAF Works — Better Results for the Citizens by Using CAF. — Подробнее .
11. Cotton J., Vollrath D., Frogatt K., Lengnick-Hall M., Jennings K. (1988). «Employee participation: diverse forms and different outcomes». Acade-my of Management Review, No. 13, рр. 8–22.
12. Cressey P., Williams R. (1990). Participation in Change: New Technology and the Role of Employee Involvement. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of the Living and Working Conditions.
13. Dachler P., Wilpert B. (1978). «Conceptual dimensions and boundaries of participation in organizations: a critical evaluation». Administrative Science Quarterly, No. 23, рр. 1–37.
14. De Leede J., Looise J. (1994). Participatie en Organisatie. HRM Thema Cahiers XXIV. Kluwer Bedrijfswetenschappen.
15. Decreto Legislativo 27 Ottobre 2009, n. 150. — Подробнее .
16. Delaney J., Sockell D. (1990). «Employee involvement programs, unionization and organizational flexibility». Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings, August, рр. 264–268.
17. Farnham D., Hondeghem A., Horton S. (Eds.) (2005). Staff Participation and Public Management Reform. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
18. Geary J., Sisson K. (1994). Conceptualising Direct Participation in Organisational Change — The EPOC Project. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
19. Gill C., Krieger H. (2000). «Recent survey evidence participation in Europe: towards a European model?» European Journal of Industrial Rela-tions, Vol. 6, Nо. 1, рр. 109–132.
20. Heller F., Pusic E., Strauss G., Wilpert B. (1998). Organisational Participation: Myth and Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
21. Locke E., Schweiger D. (1979). «Participation in decision-making: one more look». Research in Organizational Behavior, No. 1, рр. 265–339.
23. Maslov D. (2014). «Raising effectiveness and quality in public administration through application of the european common assessment framework (CAF model): Tatarstan case». The 22nd Conference «From Pre-Weberianism to Neo-Weberianism?», May 22–24, Budapest, Hungary.
24. Niven P. (2003). Balanced Scorecard — Step-by-Step for Government and Non-Profit Agencies. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
25. Parys M. (2002). «Staff participation and involvement in the public sector reform of the Belgian federal government: the case of the artemi-senquiry». EGPA, September 4–7, Potsdam.
26. Parys M., Thijs N. (2003). «Business process re-engineering: or how to enable bottom-up participation in a top down reform programme». EGPA, September 3–6, Oeiras.
27. Putseys L., Pelgrims C., Steen T. (2003). «Administrative reform and the role of participation in the flemish community». EGPA, September 3–6, Oeiras.
28. Ramsay H. (1991). «Reinventing the wheel? A review of the development and performance of employee involvement». Human Resources Management Journal, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 1–22.
29. Staes P., Thijs N., Stoffels A., Geldof S. (2011). Five Years of CAF 2006: From Adolescence to Maturity — What Next? A Study on the Use, the Support and the Future of the Common Assessment Framework. Maastricht: EIPA.
30. Wagner J., Leana C., Locke E., Schweiger D. (1997). «Cognitive and motivational frameworks in U.S. research on participation: a meta-analysis of primary effects». Journal of Organizational Behavior, No. 18, рр. 49–65.
Научный сотрудник Ивановского филиала РАНХиГС при Президенте РФ, председатель комитета по качеству в государственном и муниципальном управлении Всероссийской организации качества.
Ведущий лектор Ресурсного центра CAF, секретарь Фламандской ассоциации государственного управления, Европейский институт государственного управления (European Institute of Public Administration, EIPA).
Private sector actively use social responsibility in order to achieve comparative advantage and better performance, at the same time responsibility of an organisation for the impacts of its decisions and activities on society and the environment has always been the main objective of the public sector. Public sector organisations have to embrace a responsible behaviour in order to develop the economic, social and environmental components of the community (local, national and international) in which they operate. Public management practice shows widely use of business methods and tools adopted to public sector. One of the prime example practiced throughout Europe is the Common Assessment Framework (CAF) model – a total quality management (TQM) model inspired by the EFQM Excellence Model specially designed for public sector organisations and actively growing since 2000.
SORAF, CAF and ISO26000 clauses SORAF and CAF, as two self-assessment instruments, are conceived in order to be used independently and complementarily. They should not be considered as competing with each other. A CAF diagnostic can lead to an action proposal linked to criterion 8, implementing SORAF if the organisation considers deepening this area. In a similar way it can consider implementing the ISO 9001 certification in relation to criterion 5. The implementation of SORAF can first lead the organisation to use CAF, if it intends to commit to the path of excellence and the participative approach.
Discover the world's research
- 20+ million members
- 135+ million publications
- 700k+ research projects
corporate world focused on long-term viability and investing in sustainable future for all. Impact on
The concept of social responsibility has its origins in the private sector. There are vari ous guidelines and
tools on implementing the sustainable devel opment goals (SGDs). Many approach es have a long history
and has been developed before the UN Agenda 2030. The first edition of the EFQM Excellenc e Model , a
Framework for Sustainability” [1] This model gi ve s organ isations a framework to support the effecti ve
translation of corporate sustainability principles into practice. International standard ISO 2 6000:2010
“Guidance on social responsibility” [2] , the world’s first voluntary standard on social responsibilit y,
responsible way. In 2016, ISO developed guid elines with explanation of the main connections betw een
the SDGs and ISO 26000 [3] . Thus the first SDG (End p overty) is strongly connected to the clause 6.4.4.2
of ISO 26000 and under the core subject “Lab our practices” states: “An organization should pa y wages
at least adequate for the needs of workers and their f amilies. In doing so, it should take into acc ount the
general level of wages in the country, the c ost of living, social security benefits and the relative living
Private sector actively use social responsibility in order to achieve comparative advantage and better
activities on society and the environment has always been the main objective of the public sector. Public
sector organisations have to embrace a responsible behaviour in order to develop the economi c, social
The CAF Model is a result of co-operation among the EU Ministers responsible for Public Ad ministration.
The CAF Resource Centre at the European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA) is in charge of further
The CAF is offered as an easy to use tool to assis t public sector organisations to introduce quality
users there are organisations from such field like Educ ation [4], Social Services, Healthcare, Transp ort
citizens/customers, people and society are achiev ed through leadership driving strategy and planning,
people, partnerships, resources and processes. It looks at the organisation from different angles at the
Being a generic tool CAF includes the 9 criteria, 28 sub criteria and the scoring system. The structure of
The nine-box structure identifies the main aspects re quiring consideration in any organisational analysis.
determine what the organisation does and how it app roaches its tasks to achieve the desired results. In
criteria 6-9, Results achieved in the fields of citizens /customers, people, social responsibil ity and key
broken down into a list of sub-criteria. The 28 sub-crit eria identify the main issues that need t o be
considered when assessing an organisation. They ar e illustrated by examples that explain the content of
administration fulfills the requirements express ed in the sub-criterion. These examples represent a l ot
of good practices from all over Europe. Not all of the m are relevant for every organisation, but many can
assessment of the enablers and results criteria into the managerial practices constitute the continu ous
The CAF aims to be a catalyst for a full impro vement process within the organisation and has five main
responsibility. First, Social Responsibility – is one of eight Principles of Excellence. These are funda mental
concepts of excellence initially defined by EFQM and translated to the public sector in order to integrate
These principles lay in the basis of the Procedure on CAF External Feedback (PEF) [9] and form the TQ M
The principle of social responsibility means that public sector organisations have to assume th eir socia l
responsibility, respect ecological sustainab ility and try to meet the major expecta tions and requirements
“Initiation” level: The organisation is aware of its i mpact on society (social and environ mental).
responsibility as a public institution; the organ isation identifies the areas of impact in t erms of
The social responsibility principle is partly refl ected in 3 Enables criteria of CAF: “Leadership”, “Strategy
& Planning”, “Partnerships and Resources” and th e 7th criterion of Results “People Result s”. And the
importance of social responsibility issues on the way to sustainable development is proved by its the
directly integration into the structure of the CAF Model : the 8th criterion of CAF is “Social Resp onsibility
The main mission of a public organisation is alwa ys dedicated to satisfying a category of n eeds and
expectations of the society. This may include the organisation’s approach and contribution to qualit y of
life, protection of the environment, preser vation of global resources, equal employment opp ortunities,
logic, the main feature of social responsibility transla tes the will of the organisation, on the one hand, to
integrate social and environmental aspects in its decision-making considerations (criterion 2), and on
the other hand, to be able to respond to the i mpact of its decisions and activities on society and the
improvement activities; to measure your own pr ogress; to identify good practices as ind icated by high
scoring for Enablers and Results; to help the organisati on to find valid partners to learn from. A 10-step
implementation plan (fig. 2) helps organisations t o use CAF in the most efficient and effective wa y.
Detailed guidelines of self-assessment procedu re, scoring panel and tools can be found in CAF brochure
broken down into a list of sub-criteria ; sub -criteria identify the main issues that need t o be considered
performance measurements. Each sub-criterion is illu strated by examples, good practices th ose explain
Self-assessment group consider what the organisati on is achieving regarding its social r esponsibility,
organisation on a local, national or international l evel. This perception can be obtained through differ ent
sources, including surveys, reports, public press m eetings, NGOs, CSOs (civic service organisations),
direct feedback from stakeholders and the neighb ourhood, etc. The perception gives an indica tion of
the effectiveness of the social and environm ental strategies. It includes the view on the impact on the
responsibility. It should give a clear indication of the effectiveness of the approaches of the organisati on
on societal issues. They can consider the ethical b ehaviour, the initiatives and results of prevention of
health risks, the initiatives to exchange knowledg e, the initiatives to preserve the res ources and reduce
CAF experts and national correspondents actively apply CAF methodology to different sectors and fields.
SORAF is a self-assessment tool aiming at devel oping the social responsibility of the pub lic sector and
SORAF helps to identify the impacts of the organisa tion on its stakeholders and its sphere of influenc e
1. Governance of the organisation: Is social r esponsibility integrated into the vision, strategy and
5. Fair operating practices: what are the prac tices put in place to fight against corru ption? How are
To conclude, SORAF deepens the diagnostic of social r esponsibility inclusion into the workings of the
public organisation. SORAF does this particularl y by extending the issues considered and the inclusi on of
Despite the effort to become a standard for all types of private or public organisations, the ISO 26000
standard is limited in its application in public organisations. In this respect the purp ose of SORAF is to:
can lead to an action proposal linked to criteri on 8, implementing SORAF if the or ganisation considers
deepening this area. In a similar way it can consider i mplementing the ISO 9001 certifica tion in relation
to criterion 5. The implementation of SORAF can firs t lead the organisation to use CAF , if it intends to
Framework – C AF 2006 is criterion 8 “Societ y Results”. In CAF 2013 a new term h as been introduced –
“Social responsibility”, and the name of criteri on has been update d. Social Responsibility Results becam e
a part of the CAF criteria. Currently EUPAN CAF W orking Group is developing a new version of the model
– CAF 2020 [11]. Definitely a new CAF will respond t o main modern challenges in public administration
6. Staes P., Thijs N., Stoffels A. and Geldof S. Five Year s of CAF 2006: From Adolescence to Maturity
Five Years of CAF 2006: From Adolescence to Maturity -What next? A study on the use, the support and the future of the Common Assessment Framework
- P Staes
- N Thijs
- A Stoffels
- S Geldof
Staes P., Thijs N., Stoffels A. and Geldof S. Five Years of CAF 2006: From Adolescence to Maturity -What next? A study on the use, the support and the future of the Common Assessment Framework. EIPA, Maastricht, 2011. -160 p.
- P Staes
- N Thijs
- D Claessens
Staes P., Thijs N., Claessens D. CAF Improvement Identification, Prioritisation and Implementation. -Maastricht: CAF Resource Centre European Institute of Public Administration, EIPA, 2016. -250 p.
CAF 2013. Improving Public Organisations through Self-Assessment. Maastricht: European CAF Resource Centre. EIPA, 2012. -78 p.
Social Responsibility Assessment Framework. -Brussels: Federal Public Service Personnel and organisation
Dochot J.-M. et al. Social Responsibility Assessment Framework. -Brussels: Federal Public Service Personnel and organisation, 2016. -88 p.
HILDE T. HIMMELWEIT, A. N. OPPENHEIM and PAMELA VINCE in collaboration with others. Television and t.
EFQM Excellence Model in Higher Education
Looking through and beyond the TQM horizon: Lessons learned from world-class companies
Purpose – The paper aims to investigate the best common management practices of the world-class companies identified in Brazil and Japan; and propose a business model aimed at helping companies to achieve world-class level of excellence. Design/methodology/approach – A cross-sectional survey is the methodology employed. The balanced scorecard and seven categories with 80 key elements focusing on . [Show full abstract] the Malcolm Baldrige Award were some approaches used to achieve the research's aims. Findings – The main conclusion is that senior managers are positively leading successful top companies with a high focus on customer satisfaction and are continuously improving the six dimensions of their total quality process – as some managers do; but through a systematic self-management process, they have effectively refined it more than others. Research limitations/implications – The paper investigated only the internal best practices that permeate the Brazilian and Japanese top companies and manufacturing industries. Further research should be done in order to investigate the works outside those companies; to study the top service companies; and also to apply the statistical inference instead of descriptive cross-sectional method of analysis. Practical implications – It is recommended that senior managers continuously find ways to update and improve their daily leadership skills; clearly define their business areas; and reinforce the quality assurance system and support the integration of TQM with other management systems. Originality/value – It provides a benchmark of excellence practices and valuable suggestions to senior managers interested in implementing or improving their TQM process; and proposes a new business measurement model and conceptual ways for companies to achieve a world-class level of excellence.
Recommended publications
Global Enterprises- Visions and Structures
Successful globalization requires good strategic vision and its implementation. Strategic vision refers to what an enterprise expects to be its ideal image in the long-term future. In the context of globalization, this ideal image is a primary driver for the enterprise’s planning and implementation of GET. The guidelinefor such an envisioning process will be the planning of a strategic vision for . [Show full abstract] the enterprise’s future position. In this regard, it is worth noting what Tregoe and Tobia (1990) have to say: “In the companies we know that are successfully making the transition to a more collaborative organization, the key to success is developing and then living by a common strategic vision. When you agree on an overall direction, you can be flexible about the means to achieve it. …. Really powerful visions are simply told. The Ten Commandments, the Declaration of Independence, a Winston Churchill World War II speech — all present messages that are so simple and direct you can almost touch them. Our corporate strategies should be equally compelling.” It is vital for the success of GET that we develop a strategic vision of a global organization that is as palpable as some of the visions in day-to-day lives.
13 Early Stage Researcher PhD positions in the ED-ARCHMAT European Joint Doctorate in Archaeologica.
Читайте также: