1. Model Refreshing Review INTRODUCTION

2. Content Explain the Process used Talk about changes at different levels Question and Answer session What next?

3. Why Refresh The Model? Introduction in 1999 said would need to check improvements introduced after Award cycles Responses from members to the question How often should the Model be refreshed – every 2 years Some key issues have become more prominent in members/users organisations since the 1999 update

4. Project Scope Very specific scope for project: Fundamental Concepts - Review expression of fundamental concepts & current examples Criteria Definitions - Ensuring definitions are full & written in an understandable manner Sub-Criteria - Checking for applicability, relevance & appropriateness Guidance Points - Checking for applicability, relevance and appropriateness Criteria Weightings - Check that weightings assigned the criterion in 1989 are still appropriate RADAR – Consideration of expanding the meaning & application of RADAR

5. Model Refreshing Project - Inputs From customers directly through the Management Practices Survey Communication to all NPOs telling them about the project and asking how they would like to be involved and for any inputs Comparison work with other Models Licensed Trainers given invitation to contribute General inputs gathered over last two years Inputs from EFQM projects and people

6. Model Refreshing Project – Review Group Roger Cliffe – previous project, link to Exec Committee, User input, experienced assessor Xavier Tort- Martorell – Academic input, training EMP.TQM students Richard Parker – NPO input and experienced award Manager Walter Ludwig – User input and experienced assessor, NPO input Nikos Avlonas – User input, experienced assessor, academic input Mark Webster – previous project link, user, experienced trainer and assessor Manfred Jung – link to German sustainability project, experienced assessor and trainer Diane Dibley – EFQM Project Manager

7. Model Refreshing Project – Process (1) Inputs sorted and filed in working Inputs document Review team have agreed work plan & criteria for including inputs: Fits with Project Is Evolution not Revolution Changes relate to Fundamental Concepts (enhance relationship between Model and Concepts) Inputs are evidence/referenced based (new academic or experiential)

8. Model Refreshing Project – Process (2) Drafted & circulated proposals Circulated drafts to NPOs for paper review and input Planned communications including – Ongoing NPO communications, Member mailings, EFQM Magazine and Barcelona Conference, Internet Approval for implementing proposals given by the EFQM Executive Committee

9. Model Refreshing Review CHANGES

10. Fundamental Concepts of Excellence Titles stay same except Public Responsibility becomes Corporate Social Responsibility Short expression of the concept – 1 sentence More detail about what the concept would look like in an organisation Bullet point benefits list updated Re-enforce concepts as basis for the EFQM Excellence Model

11. EFQM Excellence Model - Criteria Definitions NO CHANGES TO MODEL CRITERIA Definitions have been updated Enhanced old content Added new Reflecting concepts

12. EFQM Excellence Model – Criterion Parts Still 32 Changes to words not meaning 1 addition and 1 combination

13. Leadership 1a – Develop Mission, Vision & Values… 1b - are personally involved… 1c - are involved with… 1d - motivate, support & recognise.. 1a Develop Mission, Vision, Values & Ethics … 1b no change 1c interact with… 1d reinforce a culture of Excellence with the organisations people 1e identify and champion organisational change RefreshedCurrent

14. Policy & Strategy 2a – are based on …stakeholders 2b – based on information from measurement research, learning & other creativity… 2c – are developed reviewed & updated 2d - are deployed through a framework… 2e – communicated & implemented 2a – No change 2b – based on information from… & external related activities 2c- No change 2d - are communicated and deployed through a framework of key processes RefreshedCurrent

15. Guidance Points Many changes to guidance points Addition - pick up themes Clarification Removal of duplication Training and guidance to re-enforce the message that these are guidance points NOT a standard

16. RADAR The text supporting RADAR has been enhanced to clarifying meaning Results – quantifying some, many, most – ¼, ½, ¾ Trends for 100% no longer need to be 5 years but 3

17. Model Refreshing Review THEMES FOR UPDATES

18. Corporate Social Responsibility CSR 3e Caring for People 4a Key Partnerships 4b Managing Finances 4c Management of resources 5c – e Society as future customers 9a & b Financial Results8 a & b Society Results CSR Concept 2a Seeking stakeholders input 2c Balancing needs of stakeholders & the environment 1a Developing Ethics & Public responsibilities 1c Interacting with stakeholders 1d.Encouraging equal opportunities

19. Market and Market Segment Market & Market Segment 1a Organisations Mission & Vision 5c developing products for current & future markets 5d marketing products 2a Identifying & collecting information 2b Competitors performance 2c Reaffirming market position 6a Customer Perceptions 6b Indicators e.g loyalty 3b Acquiring & matching skills to match required market 8 a Society Image Customer Focus Concept 9 Market Share

20. Governance 1b process for effective Governance 4b establishing and implementing core governance process at all levels 2a gathering needs & expectations from stakeholders 2b gathering other inputs for development of policy & strategy 9 Reporting Financial outcomes Non conformances CSR Concept Management by Process & Facts Concept

21. Next Steps Changes incorporated in 2004 Awards English brochure – Introducing Excellence, Concepts, Model – beginning January Other materials and translations through the year Training already updated – Assessor Training and Assessing for Excellence