European CAF Event Self-Assessment and Beyond Rome 17-18 November 2003 Main Points for discussion: introduction to parallel sessions Patrick Staes - Belgium

Introduction Member of IPSG Evaluation of CAF 1 started up during Belgian presidency Strongly involved with J.-M. Dochot and Christian Engel in development of CAF 2002 Now 1 Year CAF 2002 500 CAF applications EIPA study Personal experiences in Belgium

Session 1. National strategies (1) Political leadership concerning the CAF Engagement of the EU Ministers: CAF as an instrument of building Europe Political leadership in each MS CAF and the national Modernisation strategies Added value of an European model in an existing national environment: does CAF disturb or stimulate change? Top down or bottom up strategy, pull or push, to force or to seduce What’s the added value to make specific CAF models National versus European CAF. ( e.g. a local – a Danish – a Flemish or a Walloon – a French or a German CAF etc.) Specific sector CAFs (e.g. a police – a health care etc.)

Session 1. National strategies (2) Role of the National resource centres : non, one ore more than one National Quality Conferences and or Awards : the link between CAF and good practices Added value of external evaluators The development of national databases The return on CAF- Investment (e.g. Belgium: 120 applications – CAFnetworks-3QC -public debate among 5 ministers – collaboration between the administrative levels

Session 2. CAF: lessons learned (1) How to guarantee the quality of the SA-process Prevent self-deceiving and manipulation in composing the SAG and guarantee freedom of speech Elementary knowledge of TQM necessary: CAF needs training First step: define the basic elements: stakeholders, leadership, citizens/clients, partners etc. Foresee access to relevant information to have good evidences What’s the ideal size of the organisation to use CAF? Why do we need the scoring ? How to score: keep the scoring simple? Do we need a comma? What does the figures really mean? Checklist approach versus consensus approach More than one SAG in an SA process.

Session 2. CAF: lessons learned (2) How to result in effective actions plans? Define on the forehand what output you expect from CAF Need for the knowledge of quality tools A specific Quality direction The role of Internal and external Consultants CAF and communication CAF as a stimulant for internal and external communication CAF needs a strong communication plan Do we need a CAFplus or a CAF 2005-2008-2010 ?

Session 3. CAF and TQM strategie The direct link between CAF and TQM Training for CAF starts with an introduction on TQM All the criteria need the appropriate measurement tools Added value of external evaluators to buildup action plans The impact of successive CAF applications Does using the CAF several time leads to a TQM approach in the organisation? What do we learn from successive CAF applications, how to keep the interest?

Session 4. CAF and other TQM-tools CAF as a bridge to and between other TQM tools Common language Common holistic approach CAF and the others An integrated or separated use of CAF and BSC From CAF to EFQM or from EFQM to CAF CAF in countries were other TQM tools are dominant CAF in the context of a large programme of modernisation or change

Some conclusions CAF is just a tool but of growing importance. CAF allows people to participate in the development of their organisation: first step to sustainable improvement Starting with CAF is always a risk but CAF gives a good return on investment The CAF-structure must be respected at all time, the application allows a lot of creativity CAF can be a good introduction to TQM CAF helps to build Europe from inside and so must remain an European tool If we want to adapt CAF: we need an agenda for/and a consensus