|
"Good is the enemy of
Great"
"Most businesses—like most of anything else in life—fall somewhere between
mediocre and good. Few are great." Jim Collins, Good to Great: Why Some
Companies Make the Leap and Others Don’t.
With the aim to help quality leaders sustain the commitment to continual
improvement, I provided the following tables that incorporate the five-level
capability concept for assessing and measuring the progress from mediocre to good
and from good to great.
Capability Level
|
Level |
Description |
|
5 |
Great |
|
4 |
Good |
|
3 |
|
2 |
Mediocre |
|
1 |
Poor |
Level 5 Leader – Jim Collins
"Level 5 leaders channel their ego needs away from themselves and into the
larger goal of building a great company. It’s not that Level 5 leaders have no
ego or self-interest. Indeed, they are incredibly ambitious—but their ambition
is first and foremost for the institution, not themselves."
http://www.jimcollins.com/lab/level5/index.html
"Great leaders plot points" - tjc
Effective leaders have always pursued excellence and quality by applying
their intuitive or unconscious knowledge of variation and its interrelationships
with psychology (human behavior) and systems to influence and direct change.
While effective leaders have always had an intuitive understanding of
variation, a conscious awareness and understanding provides the common
understanding needed to expand application from the few to the many. The result
will be more great leaders and organizations.
Capability -- Knowledge and Understanding of Variation
|
Level |
Type of Capability |
Description |
|
5 |
Unconscious
competence |
Knowledge
continually applied in achieving and sustaining excellence. |
|
4 |
Conscious
competence |
New knowledge
becomes a habit; routine way of thinking. |
|
3 |
Conscious
incompetence |
Making the
transition from an intuitive awareness and understanding. Aware of the
basics; have to work at it. |
|
2 |
Unconscious
incompetence. |
Unconscious
(intuitive) awareness, understanding and application. |
|
1 |
Don’t know,
don’t care, ignorance is bliss |
Current
knowledge and methods are good enough. |
Self-Assessment – your knowledge and
understanding of variation:
http://www.successthroughquality.com
Capability
Adult development stages in evolved societies
|
Orientation |
Level 2
Individualist) (10%) |
Level 3
Group Contributor (55%) |
Level 4
Manager
(25%) |
Level 5
Leader
(10%) |
|
View of Others |
Instruments of own need gratification |
Needed to contribute to own self image |
Collaborator, delegate, peer |
Contributors to own integrity and balance |
|
Level of Self Insight |
Low |
Moderate |
High |
Very High |
|
Values |
Law of Jungle |
Community |
Self-determined |
Humanity |
|
Needs |
Overriding all others’ needs |
Subordinate to community, work group |
Flowing from striving for integrity |
Viewed in connection with own obligations and limitations |
|
Need to Control |
Very High |
Moderate |
Low |
Very low |
|
Communication |
Unilateral |
Exchange 1:1 |
Dialogue |
True Communication |
|
Organizational Orientation |
Careerist |
Good Citizen |
Manager |
System’s Leader |
Ref erence:
http://www.interdevelopmentals.org/pubs/IDM-OLaske-Post-Bureaucratic.pdf
Capability -- Software, Lean, Project Management, People
|
|
Description |
|
Levels |
Software |
Lean |
Project Management |
People |
|
5 |
Optimizing |
Transformer |
Managing Excellence |
Continuous Workforce Innovation |
|
4 |
Managed |
Continuous Improvement |
Program Management |
Mentoring |
|
3 |
Defined |
Systematic Approach |
Project Management |
Participatory Culture |
|
2 |
Repeatable |
General Awareness |
Reactive Management |
Compensation, Training, Development |
|
1 |
Initial
|
Minimal Awareness |
Crisis Management |
Staffing |
Reference: Capability Maturity Models:
-Software:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_Maturity_Model
-Project Management Institute:
http://opm3online.pmi.org/
-People:
http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmm-p/version2/index.html
Lean Enterprise Maturity Model:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1234203.1234204&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE-
Notional Comparison – Capability Level
Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence
Profit and Non-profit organizations
|
Description / Level
|
Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence |
|
Point Range
|
Description |
|
Optimizing |
5 |
700-1,000 |
Organizational Analysis and Improvement |
|
Managed |
4 |
500-700 |
Learning a &
Strategic Improvement |
|
Defined |
3 |
300-500 |
Systematic
evaluation & improvement |
|
Repeatable |
2 |
50-300 |
General
improvement orientation |
|
Initial
|
1 |
0-50 |
Reacting to
the problem |
Reference: Criteria for Performance
Excellence:
http://www.quality.nist.gov/Criteria.htm
Notional Comparison– Capability, Sigma Level, Cost of Poor
Quality
|
Capability |
Six Sigma |
|
Description |
Level |
Sigma
Level |
Conformance to Customer Requirements as a Percent
(Defect per Million Opportunities) |
COPQ as a Percent of Total Sales or Budget* |
Category |
|
Optimizing |
5 |
6 |
99.9997 % (3.4) |
Less than 1%
|
World Class
(Great) |
|
Managed |
4 |
5 |
99.9770% (230) |
5-15% |
Industry Average
(Good)
|
|
Defined |
3 |
4 |
99.3790% (6,210) |
15-25% |
|
Repeatable |
2 |
3 |
93.3200%) (66,800) |
25-40% |
|
2 |
69.200% (308,000) |
Don’t ask |
|
Initial
|
1 |
1 |
31% (690,000) |
Really, don’t ask |
Non-Competitive |
Cost of Poor Quality (COPQ). Financial costs the least significant. Most
important costs (total effect of things gone wrong) unknown and unknowable.
|
