Grayson presentation

R:Educate/ppt/Jack’s Slides/Presentations/Pittsburgh Final

American Productivity & Quality Center

C. Jackson Grayson, Jr.

Chairman & CEO


Sample of APQC Members• Allstate Ins. Company• America Online• Anadarko Petroleum• Aramco Services• Baker Hughes• Bank of America• BP Amoco • British Telecom• Carrollton-Farmers ISD • Cemex• CenterPoint Energy• Clark County Schools • J. P. Morgan Chase • Citigroup Inc.• Cobb County Schools• ConocoPhillips

• Cornell University• Dallas ISD• Dow Chemical• Educational Testing Service• Entergy• Exxon Chemical• Federal Express• Ford Motor• General Electric• General Motors• Hallmark Cards• Houston Comm. College• Halliburton Energy• Hewlett-Packard• Houston IS.• IBM Corporation• Intel Corp.


• Johnson & Johnson• Kellogg• Lockheed Martin• Marathon Oil• Metro Technology Centers• Miami-Dade Co. Schools• Microsoft• Montgomery Co. Schools• National Security Agency• NASA• NEC• Nortel• Occidental Petroleum• Pfizer• Raytheon• Redstone Properties• SchoolCity Inc.

• Schlumberger• Siemens Medical Systems• Singapore Productivity Ctr.• Spring Branch ISD• Sprint• Tata Iron & Steel Co.• Texaco• Texas Children’s Hospital• 3 M Company• United Parcel Service, Inc.• U.S. Government Agencies• University of California• UT MDAndersonCancer Ctr.• Unocal• Washington Mutual• World Bank Group• Xerox

Sample of APQC Members


Levels of evidence to link inputs and processes to educational outcomes

• Expert opinion, anecdotes, case studies• Correlation (but causation?)• Trial and error; Design of Experiments• Hypotheses testing; Value added • Multi Factorial Analysis—OFAT, Full,

Fractional • Bayesian analysis; probabilities; utility risk

preferences• ANOVA ; Gold standard


Measurement and Improvement

• Don’t focus only on measuring the value of education technology

• Focus just as much on improving the value of education technology

• For that you need to focus on the end-to-end processes of designing and delivering education technology


4 Recommendations

1. Create more of a “Process Focus” in seeking to measure value in education technology.

2. Move your organizations more toward “Total Process Management.”

3. Conduct Professional Development on “Processes” and “Statistics” at all levels.

4. What can you do on Monday morning?


1. Move toward a total process focus in measuring value

Involve all persons who are providers and customers of technology for educational improvement

Hardware and software staff, teachers, principals, students, suppliers, facilities

Draw a process map of the entire end-to-end process and form a process team.

Measure that process against outcomes


Use measures like cost effectiveness, cycle time,

staff productivity, and process efficiency

Measure the process not the technology alone

Compare process measures with outcomes

Create Process Owners that cross functions with

staff, dollars, time, authority, and responsibility

Align process with district, state, and federal system

goals


• Most education organizations have

reams of data organized around

functions, programs, grants or

governmental data requirements.

• But few education organizations have

much data organized, managed,

mapped, or measured in terms of

“processes” (incl. educ. Technology)

A problem is…


The “missing link” in education improvement is a greater focus on processes.

• But most educators do not think “processes”.

• They do not map, or measure processes.

• They do not analyze or benchmark processes.

• They don’t link inputs—processes—outcomes.

• They focus functionally, not cross-functionally

• They don’t organize for process management


PIIE

Process Improvement & Implementation in

Education


Participating School Districts

1. Aldine ISD - TX 55,000

2. Anne Arundel - MD 75,000

3. Boston Schools 60,000

4. Brazosport ISD- TX 14,000

5. Broward County 268,000

6. Carrollton FB - TX 26,000

7. Clark County – NV 257,000

8. Cobb County - GA 100,000

9. Fairfax County – VA 163,000

10.Galena Park ISD – TX 20,000

11.Galveston ISD – TX 10,000

12.Gwinnett County - GA 123,000

13. Houston ISD – TX 212,000

14. Lake Washington – WA 24,000

15. Long Beach – CA 97,000

16. Los Angeles – CA 747,000

17. Miami–Dade - FL 374,000

18. Montgomery Cty – MD 139,000

19. Philadelphia City – PA 193,000

20. Pinellas County – FL 115,000

21. Pittsburgh Schools 34,000

22. Santa Cruz Cty PS – CA 14,000

23. Wake County - NC 105,000

Total Students: 3,225,000


How It Worked• APQC created a year-long pilot: 2005

• To obtain and analyze process data from these 23 districts.

• These districts selected three processes:

− Assessing Student Achievement

− Managing Information Technology

− Finding and Hiring Teachers

• Surveys were designed to collect process data—about 80 questions per survey.

• Districts sent completed surveys to APQC who validated and normalized the data


APQC Process Classification Framework for EducationO

PE

RA

TIN

G P

RO

CE

SS

ES

1.0

Develop a Strategic Plan for

the District

2.0

Design, Deliver and

Assess Instruction

3.0

Design and Deliver Support

Services

4.0

Design and Manage

Operations

5.0

Develop and Manage

Stakeholder Relations

and Services

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

& S

UP

PO

RT

SE

RV

ICE

S

6.0 Develop and Manage Human Resources

7.0 Manage Information Technology

12.0 Manage Knowledge, Improvement, and Change

11.0 Manage Intergovernmental and Agency Relationships

10.0 Manage Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) and Security

9.0 Acquire, Construct and Manage Facilities and Property

8.0 Manage Financial Resources


7.1 Manage the business of IT 7.2 Develop and manage customer relationships 7.3 Manage business resiliency and risk 7.4 Manage enterprise information 7.5 Develop and maintain IT solutions 7.6 Deploy IT solutions 7.7 Deliver and support IT services 7.8 Manage IT knowledge

IT Process Groups in PCF

* APQC Process Classification Framework* APQC Process Classification Framework* 8 Process Groups; 35 Processes; 60 Activities* 8 Process Groups; 35 Processes; 60 Activities


• Process and outcomes data were analyzed in terms of 4 key metrics:– Cost effectiveness– Cycle time– Process Efficiency– Staff Productivity

• Individual customized Reports were sent back to each district

• Giving them measures of their own performance, and also compared to all the other districts.

How It Worked



Benefits to Districts

Districts can compare their processes with other districts in terms of:– Cost Effectiveness, Staff Productivity– Cycle Time and Process Efficiency

For some processes, they can compare their metrics with business and other sectors

Funds & time are spent on improvement of key processes, and not searching for comparisons

Causes cross-functional process analysis


Benefits to Districts

Offers data to drastically reduce non-value-added time and cost: “waste”

Allows apple-to-apple comparisons because of the common taxonomy

Savings can be re-allocated to instruction

Provides the basis for moving from function to process and systems management


2.To improve the value of education technology to improve education outcomes, move toward---

“Total Process Management.”


Mktg. IT

Functional System--Vertical

SalesProduct-ion.

Engine-ringR&D


Functional System with cross-functional processes

Process Process

Process

Process

Process

Process

Instruction

Process Process

Process Process

Process

Process

Process Process

Process Process

Process

Process

Process

Information Technology

Human Resources

Process Process

Process Process

Process

Process

Process

Food Service


Leadership

Instructional Design

Instructional Delivery

Grade Reporting

Instructional Support

Curriculum Mgmt

Staff Development

Info. Technology

Instructional Assessment

Pro

cess

Man

agem

ent

Functional Management

Fo

od

Ser

vice

Tra

ns

po

rta

tio

n

Fin

an

cia

l A

cc

ou

nti

ng

Mai

nte

nan

ce

Hu

ma

n

Res

ou

rces

Pu

bli

c In

form

atio

n

Str

ate

gic

P

lan

nin

g

Cu

rric

ulu

m &

In

stru

ctio

n

Process and

Outcomes

Focused

A MatrixOrganization


Adapted from: BPM Trends; 9/05

Knowledge ManagementQuality Tools

Baldrige, Deming, TQM

• Lean

• Six Sigma

Information

Technology

Process Data,

Measures &

MetricsBenchmarking

Total Process Management

Process Owners

Core BPM Team• Process

Improvement

• Process Innovation

• Efficiency

• Effectiveness

Change

ManagementImplementation

Total Process Management


Transformative gains

• Incremental process improvements of 2% to 10% is helpful. Do them.

• But It will no longer be sufficient.

• Education needs transformative process gains of 10% to 50% each year, or even higher, in key processes.


Gains with levels of process management

Used with permission from Six Sigma Academy

1-2 % Cost focus

2 -10 %

10-20%

20-50%

Process Innovation

Process management

Process Improvement


3. Conduct Professional Development on “Processes” and “Statistics” at all levels

Descriptive statistics– mean, median,

mode, measures of dispersion, charting

Probabilities—Poisson, Normal

Inferential statistics —sampling,

confidence intervals, correlations,

causal linkages, hypotheses testing,

Type I and II errors, ANOVA


Data alone does not drive improvement


Use business tools focusing on process improvement and value creation

Six Sigma, Shared Services, Supply Chain Non-value-added analysis (NVA), Lean Process Management; Process Mapping Benchmarking, Communities of Practice Knowledge Management; Tacit Knowledge Work-Out and Change Acceleration Process Systems thinking; Baldrige; Productivity Transfer of Best Practices; Customer Focus;

NOAC


4. What do I Do Monday Morning?

Contact all persons involved in designing and delivering educational technology--identify needs, values, problems, opportunities

Define the process boundaries—start and stop Select a specific project; Form a process team Designate a process owner: resources, staff,

authority, responsibilities Map and measure process: “as-is” “should

be”—including all cross functions


Collect and analyze data—flag problems, brainstorm root causes, look for non-value-added time and cost.

Benchmark the process—inside & outside

Decide on action plan and implement—with roles, timetables, measures, metrics, incentives

Implement and continuously improve

4. What do I Do Monday Morning?


Your Personal Improvement?

Exercise Often

Embrace Laughter

Eat well

Love Much

Be Glad You Are Alive

Wear Sunscreen

Floss frequently

Fill Out A Survey


.


What is it you wish to change?

Costs—Lower or Higher? Student achievement? Test scores? Teacher retention? Hiring? Meet AYP goals? Decrease the dropout rate? Close your achievement gap? Improve food services? Improve on-time bus delivery?


Advantages of Process Data

Compare themselves with others See performance gaps that need

improvement Establish performance targets Improve the budget process and re-allocate

resources Identify key performance drivers Help initiate improvement steps


How PIIE Works

• Surveys were designed to collect data

• As surveys come in, APQC staff

stores the data in a repository.

• Data are then:

• Analyzed, validated, normalized

• Blinded, so data are kept totally

confidential


Potential SavingsStatistical summary of participant compared to top

performer per new hire

How much can we save by improving our HR recruiting processes?

Top Performance

$534

Average Performance

$752

Bottom Performance

$946

Your Performance

$859


PIIE Methodology: A 12-Step Process


Data

• Payroll

• Facilities

• Equipment

• Finance

Inputs

Process

Indicators

Efficiency Effectiveness

Improvement System

• Outcomes

• Indicators

Accountability System

Data Data

Improvement & Accountability Systems


Process Improvement and Innovation in Education

This lead to the creation of

PIIE




























American Productivity & Quality Center--APQC

Founded in 1977 with $10 million from 100 corporations

Non-profit, 501(c)(3) organization Annual revenues $11 million and staff of 85

Membership and Fees for Service Research, publications, training Conferences, technical services

Business, government, healthcare, education Domestic and International



• Allstate Ins. Company• America Online• Anadarko Petroleum• Aramco Services• Baker Hughes• Bank of America• BP Amoco • British Telecom• Cemex• CenterPoint Energy• Clark County Schools • J. P. Morgan Chase • Citigroup Inc.• Cobb County Schools• ConocoPhillips• Cornell University

• Dallas ISD• Dow Chemical• Entergy• Exxon Chemical• Federal Express• Ford Motor• General Electric• General Motors• Hallmark Cards• Houston Comm. College• Halliburton Energy• Hewlett-Packard• Houston I.S.D.• IBM Corporation• Intel Corp.• Johnson & Johnson


• Kellogg• Lockheed Martin• Marathon Oil• Miami-Dade Co. Public Sch.• Microsoft• Montgomery Co. Schools• National Security Agency• NASA• NEC• Nortel• Occidental Petroleum• Pfizer• Raytheon• Redstone Properties• Schlumberger• Siemens Medical Systems

• Singapore Productivity Ctr.• Spring Branch ISD• Sprint• Tata Iron & Steel Co.• Texaco• Texas Children’s Hospital• 3 M Company• United Parcel Service, Inc.• U.S. Government Agencies• University of California• UT MDAndersonCancer Ctr.• Unocal• Washington Mutual• World Bank Group• Xerox



The Quiet Crisis


1. Hong Kong / China 1. Finland 1. Finland 1. Korea

2. Finland 2. Korea 2. Japan 2. Hong Kong / China

3. Korea 3. Canada 3. Hong Kong / China

3. Finland

4. Netherlands 9. Netherlands 4. Korea 4. Japan

6. Japan 10. Hong Kong / China

8. Netherlands 9. Canada

7. Canada 14. Japan 11. Canada 12. Netherlands

19. Germany 18. Germany 16. Germany

21. Canada 28. Russia

29. Russia 32. Russia 24. Russia

37. Mexico 37. Brazil 37. Mexico 37. Mexico

40. Brazil 38. Mexico 39. Brazil 38. Brazil

International Comparisons of American StudentsInternational Comparisons of American Students

MathematicsMathematics ReadingReading ScienceScience Problem Problem SolvingSolving

28. United States28. United States





Secretary Spelling: 9/21/05Secretary Spelling: 9/21/05

“There is no Sputnik to galvanize the

nation into action….

“…the quiet crisis will cast a very long

shadow over the future if we do not

summon the will to stay competitive.

”And competitiveness begins with

education”




“We improve our business systems or lose our world competitiveness.”

C. Jackson Grayson, Jr.

An ad in New York Times and Wall Street Journal, sponsored by U. S. Steel

1975



“We improve our K-12 education system or lose our world

competitiveness.”

2005


Needed:A Process Focus in Business and

Education


Improvement Model

“Steering by Inputs, Processes & Outcomes”

• Payroll

• Expenses

• Equipment

• Facilities

Inputs

Data

• Test Results

• Achievement Gap

• Graduation Rates

• Dropouts

Outcomes

Data

A Black Box Processes

Data

• Assess Student Achievement

• Recruit Teachers

• Manage Info. Technology


Process Management

• Education can continue to make small gains doing what they are doing now.

• But until more focus on process occurs…

• Education improvement at best will be incremental, gradual, and slow

• It will not be transformative—which is what is required.


“We’re not there yet”

. The major focus for improvement is still on inputs, outcomes, and functions.

Not processes or process mgmt.

• In all of education—schools, districts,

states, federal gov’t, or universities • In many businesses• In much of TCO and TVO


Processes

• There’s no shortage of data! Most organizations—business and education-- have reams of data in their databases or warehouses.

• But few have much data organized, mapped, or measured in terms of “processes”

• Processes are typically:

• Not mapped, not measured

• Not cross-functional

• Not managed; full of non-value-added time

• Sub-optimized because of a functional focus

.


Admini-stration IT

Most are organized and managed by functions

Transpor-tation

Finance-Acctg.

Food Service

Instruc-tion


Functional Organizations don’t deal efficiently or effectively with cross functions

Food Service

Admini-stration IT

Transpor-tation

Finance-Acctg.

Instruc-tion


• Redundant checking; re-checking

• Repeated meetings and phone calls for coordination

• Queuing time; paper moving time

• Slow response to customers—internal and external

• Excessive “transition” time

There is a lot of non-value-added time in education-- “unseen” waste


Unrecorded non-value-added time

• Checking and rechecking

• Waiting time between functions

• Culture clashes

• Unnecessary red tape

• Unread documents / memos

• Long chains of approval & command


Visible Costs

Costs Not

Picked Up

By your Accounting

System


Three years ago, APQC started the Open Standards Benchmarking Collaborative--OSBC

• The purpose: a global initiative to develop a standard for commonly used processes, measures, and benchmarks.

• Hundreds of U.S. & global firms participate:• IBM Consulting Services, Booz Allen Hamilton,

Shell Oil, Gartner, Bank of America, Procter & Gamble, World Bank, and more

• OSBC strives to enable rapid and innovative improvement within business organizations:

40% Americas, 40% EMEA, and 20% Pacific Rim.


OSBC Supply Chain

• Procurement

• Logistics

• Customer Order Management

• Manufacturing

• New Product Development

• Supply Chain Planning


OSBC Finance & Accounting

• Account Payable / Expenses

• Finance Organization

• Fixed Asset

• General Accounting & Reporting

• Internal Controls

• Order-to-Cash ; Payroll

• Profit & Cost Management


OSBC Human Resources

• Create and Manage HR Planning, Policy, and Strategies

• Develop and Counsel (includes training)

• Manage Employee Information

• Recruit, Source and Select

• Redeploy and Retire

• Reward and Retain




























Since outcomes can’t be changed without changes in processes that produce outcomes

The “missing link” in education improvement is a greater focus on processes.

• But most educators do not think “processes”.

• They do not map, or measure processes.

• They do not analyze or benchmark processes.

• They don’t link inputs—processes—outcomes.

• They focus functionally, not cross-functionally

• They don’t organize for process management


Instead of only an OSBC

for Business

Why Not Do the Same Thing

In Education?


Process Improvement and Innovation in Education

This lead to the creation of

PIIE


Improvement commonly means improvement in existing processes in a particular function.

Innovation means a radical re-design of work, most often cross-functional–

Improvement and Innovation

“What is the best possible way to do it, regardless of our

present work processes and organization structure?”


23 Districts were invited to participate in the OSBC-E for a year-long pilot

A subset of those districts came to APQC on Dec. 13-14 to begin the “design” process

A Kickoff Meeting was held on Jan. 6-7 at APQC with all districts—80 attended

3 Process areas were selected for the pilot and “Working Groups” were formed:

InstructionHuman ResourcesInformation Technology

The Pilot


PIIE Methodology: A 12-Step Process


APQC Process Classification Framework for EducationO

PE

RA

TIN

G P

RO

CE

SS

ES

1.0

Develop a Strategic Plan for

the District

2.0

Design, Deliver and

Assess Instruction

3.0

Design and Deliver Support

Services

4.0

Design and Manage

Operations

5.0

Develop and Manage

Stakeholder Relations

and Services

MA

NA

GE

ME

NT

& S

UP

PO

RT

SE

RV

ICE

S

6.0 Develop and Manage Human Resources

7.0 Manage Information Technology

12.0 Manage Knowledge, Improvement, and Change

11.0 Manage Intergovernmental and Agency Relationships

10.0 Manage Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) and Security

9.0 Acquire, Construct and Manage Facilities and Property

8.0 Manage Financial Resources


• Efficiency

• Effectiveness




Education Process Management

Adapted from: BPM Trends; 9/05

Knowledge ManagementQuality Tools

Baldrige, Deming, TQM

• Lean

• Six Sigma

Information

Technology

Process Data,

Measures &

MetricsBenchmarking

Education Process

Management

Process Owners

Core BPM Team• Process

Improvement

• Process Innovation

• Efficiency

• Effectiveness

Change

ManagementImplementation



K-12 As a SystemAll subsystems should

work together as a system

None should exist on their own

They should be linked, aligned,

intertwined

Have a common vision and work

together

The problem is that they often aren’t a “system”



Decisions are not doing Blaming is not doing Meetings are not doing Talking about doing is not doing

Doing is taking action…..Doing is taking action….. Doing somethingDoing something


“My Plate Is Full”

“But, full of what?”

Non-ValueNon-Value

AddedAdded

Activities?Activities?


Reduce “Waste”

• “Non-Value-Added” time and costs

• Also, known as “Lean”


Visible Costs

Costs Not

Picked Up

By your Accounting

System


“The largest and easiest gains in

knowledge work come from re-

defining the task and eliminating

what need not be done.” (Waste)

Drucker, 1992

Managing the Future: The 1990s and Beyond


Communities of Practice



Processes Outcomes

Outcomes cannot be changed without changes in processes!!


• Located in Houston; Non-profit 501(c)(3)

• 30 years old

• Staff: 85; Budget $12 million

• Revenues: Membership: 30%, Fees 70%

• Worked in 54 nations; 6 continents

• Board of Directors: 40 National Leaders

• Mission: Improve productivity and quality in all organizations www.apqc.org

APQC: American Productivity & Quality Center



• Allstate Ins. Company• America Online• Anadarko Petroleum• Aramco Services• Baker Hughes• Bank of America• BP Amoco • British Telecom• Carrollton-Farmers Branch • Cemex• CenterPoint Energy• Clark County Schools • J. P. Morgan Chase • Citigroup Inc.• Cobb County Schools• ConocoPhillips

• Cornell University• Dallas ISD• Dow Chemical• Educational Testing Service• Entergy• Exxon Chemical• Federal Express• Ford Motor• General Electric• General Motors• Hallmark Cards• Houston Comm. College• Halliburton Energy• Hewlett-Packard• Houston I.S.D.• IBM Corporation• Intel Corp.


• Johnson & Johnson• Kellogg• Lockheed Martin• Marathon Oil• Metro Technology Centers• Miami-Dade Co. Schools• Microsoft• Montgomery Co. Schools• National Security Agency• NASA• NEC• Nortel• Occidental Petroleum• Pfizer• Raytheon• Redstone Properties• SchoolCity Inc.

• Schlumberger• Siemens Medical Systems• Singapore Productivity Ctr.• Spring Branch ISD• Sprint• Tata Iron & Steel Co.• Texaco• Texas Children’s Hospital• 3 M Company• United Parcel Service, Inc.• U.S. Government Agencies• University of California• UT MDAndersonCancer Ctr.• Unocal• Washington Mutual• World Bank Group• Xerox



SixSigma

Metrics

1977Productivity: Competitiveness

1983Quality (Baldrige Award)

1991Benchmarking

1994Transfer of Best Practices

1995Knowledge Management

1996Knowledge Sharing-CoP

1999Education

2004OSBC—Bus.

2005PIIE

Process Evolution at APQC


Benchmarking to find best practices Knowledge Management; Knowledge

Sharing, Knowledge Retention Communities of Practice Quality/Baldrige, Productivity, Six Sigma Research; Publications; Conferences Training — public and on-site Technical assistance

APQC Products & Services


Business & EducationProcess

Management


Reminders about Measures

What is done with measures is as important as what your measures are

Get the customers in your measures Measure trends, not just snapshots Any process, job, group, department,

organization can be measured You change what you measure


What makes a good measure?

1. Are you sure about what you want to measure?

2. Must a single measure be used or could a combination of measures be developed?

3. Is the purpose to measure level, trend or percent of some standard?

4. Should inputs other than labor and time be considered?



Focus on the vital few – measure only what matters and what you can do something as a result of having the measure in place

Use measures as a tool, not just for analysis, but for effective management

Link measurements to performance evaluation of teams, individuals, entities



What is done with measures is as important as what your measures are

Get the customers in your measures Measure trends, not just snapshots Any process, job, group, department,

organization can be measured You change what you measure


What makes a good measure?

1. Are you sure about what you want to measure?

2. Must a single measure be used or could a combination of measures be developed?

3. Is the purpose to measure level, trend or percent of some standard?

4. Should inputs other than labor and time be considered?



Focus on the vital few – measure only what matters and what you can do something as a result of having the measure in place

Use measures as a tool, not just for analysis, but for effective management

Link measurements to performance evaluation of teams, individuals, entities



Grayson presentation

Documents

process focus

process map

process measures

process efficiency

process dataabout

process team

education improvement

total process management