Lessons learned on the self-assessment process: some FAQs Dr. Christian Engel State Chancellery of Northrhine-Westfalia / Germany European Institute of Public Administration (EIPA November 2003

FAQ 1: „Translation“ possible? „Translation“ and „adaptation“ are not only possible but desired and helpful (several Member States have taken such initiatives) CAF needs to remain flexible to be used in various contexts and situations

FAQ 2: Relation with other activities / reforms Administrations across Europe are engaged in a large number of reform initiatives and processes CAF intends to build a logical framework around these and should where possible to be linked to existing initiatives and actions Not an alternative but a supplement.... „Wrong“ presentation can lead to communication breakdown (CAF as a „Model“)

Quality Circles ISO 9000 People Surveys Investors in People User Manuals PD BSC Performance Management Citizen/ Customer Surveys Mission Development Audits Citizen or Service Charters ISO 14000 Budgeting, Accounting Benchmarking CRM Info Acts

FAQ 4: Valid for which organisations? Previous experience with / knowledge of „quality management“ not required (and may even cause problems) A certain level of maturity should be in place The type of organisation is not really relevant And the size? Quality rarely starts in the whole organisation!

Values in TQM General values Learn and Critisize Managing Conflicts Open Com- munication Dialogue Look to the future Culture of Trust Dealing with uncertainty Problem- solving Positive Image of Men

FAQ 4: When is the right time? Right the 1st time? The CAF can in principle be used at any time for different purposes: from simple „health check“ to a full action plan / internal reform programme But: the CAF should normally not be used for „nasty“ purposes (cutting back on finances or staff) or Be used in periods of serious „turbulence“

FAQ 5: How to convince colleagues and managers? Convincing everyone is difficult or impossible (at least in the beginning) Key players – a critical mass – need to be won over (e.g. personnel managers; financial managers; „leaders“): support can then develop (again: quality rarely starts in the whole organisation....) What is in it for people / management: find convincing arguments

FAQ 6: How much and what type of external support? CAF is a self-assessment tool, but: Experience tells us that assistance and support are needed in most organisations! Many administrations need support troughout the whole process (not just initial training...) Assistance from the public side (a public agency) is much better! External assessment required for more rigorous and precise assessment

FAQ 7: How to communicate openly with management? Not all administrations – and not all management styles – lend themselves for the CAF!

4 magenement styles

FAQ 8: What does consensus mean and how to achieve it? Perhaps „consensus“ is not the best word (shared understanding?) With consensus the focus quickly lies on scores Consensus often is driven or depends on a small number of group members No best way to achieve consensus, but most helpful way is to share out the work among the group members and discuss again

FAQ 9: Subjectivity or objectivity? CAF contains both an element of obejctivity (fact-basen approach) and subjectivity (individual knowledge and experience count) Balancing and bringing both together is the key! Evidence used usually remains week and anecdotal, „feelings“ often dominate

FAQ 10: What to do with the scoring? Strong focus on scoring / the scores in most administrations.... Nearly all administrations tend to score to high Methodological support may help Scoring system simple but with many grey areas and uncertainties Why not trying without?

FAQ 11: Does it make sense at all? Managers / politicians will in the end anyhow do what they want to do!?