Evaluation of the conceptual model and suggestions for improvement

The conceptual model was evaluated during the first stage interviews involving seven interviewees (see Table 5.1). This section explains the evaluation of a conceptual model and suggestions for improvement. The interviewees are coded as follows:

• Directors and Senior Manager in the area of quality / BE, selected from organisations that have won a national Quality or BE Award: coded as Interviewee A1 – A3;

• Chief Executive Officer and Executive from national custodians of Quality / BE award: coded as Interviewee B1-B2; and

• Consultants specialising in quality management and BE: coded as Interviewee C1-C2.

Where possible, the findings of this section are categorised as follows:

General comments on the design and contents of the proposed initial conceptual model

Main organisational improvement initiatives to be used according to the areas of implementation and BE maturity

Contingency factors to be considered in the selection of improvement initiatives

7.3.1 Evaluation of the conceptual model

7.3.1.1 General comments on the design and contents of the proposed conceptual model

In general, the design and contents of the proposed conceptual model is acceptable. Interviewee A2 has provided the following feedback which reflects that the model is acceptable:

The upper part of the model is valid. It has all the critical factors that I can think of… the model is feasible and possible to be used…the mind map at the upper part of the model is easy to be used…the model is useful and relevant…the fundamental things are there and it is really easy to be used. (Interviewee A2)

7.3.1.2 Main organisational improvement initiatives to be used according to the areas of implementation and BE maturity

As shown in Figure 7.1, the lower part of the conceptual model consists of the main organisational improvement initiatives to be used according to the areas of implementation and BE maturity. From the interviews, it was found that the information at the lower part of the model should be used with caution because there is no standard route map to achieve organisational excellence. Feedbacks obtained from the interviewees in the relation to the lower part of the model are:

The organisation might have the same starting point but it evolves into something different because the culture of organisation is different, people using the initiatives are different, and the business is fundamentally different. (Interviewee C1)

I would argue that the lower part of the model needs to be updated every couple of years to actually reflect the latest trend of improvement initiatives. (Interviewee A2)

Even if the BE maturity improves, the organisations can still be continuing to do the basic and fundamental initiatives which were started earlier…Project Management is not an improvement initiative. It is a methodology to manage improvement initiatives. (Interviewee B1)

7.3.1.3 Contingency factors to be considered in the selection of improvement initiatives

Contingency factors to be considered in the selection of improvement initiatives are shown at the upper part of the model. Feedbacks obtained from the interviewees related to the contingency factors are as follows:

For factor number 4 (available resources), it should be more about the capability of the resources to make improvement happen. It is less about the

up businesses). It is about the organisation’s ability to get cash to make improvement happen. (Interviewee C1)

Current trends of initiatives implementation are not so relevant. More work is required if we want to know the current trends of initiatives implementation. (Interviewee C2)

7.3.2 Suggestions for improvement

7.3.2.1 General comments on the design and contents of the proposed conceptual model

The main drawback of the conceptual model is that the model does not provide detailed and clear explanation of the steps / processes involved in selecting improvement initiatives. Therefore, Interviewee A1 and C2 suggested that the model should be refined to provide more explanation about the filtration / selection processes. Other suggestions obtained from the interviewees related to the overall design and contents of the model are as follows:

If you’re using a software approach then you can click on the items to obtain more information. (Interviewee A1)

There should be something about organisational profile at the top of the model. We should first look that the organisational profile. Then, does it suit with the organisation’s direction and purpose. (Interviewee C1)

7.3.2.2 Main organisational improvement initiatives to be used according to the areas of implementation and BE maturity

The main flaw found related to the lower part of the conceptual model is that it does not provide the description of the improvement initiatives. In relation to this, interviewee A2 highlighted that:

There is no description linked to the initiatives listed in the lower part of the model. It is assumed that people using this model know about the characteristics of all these initiatives, but, they often don’t.

Therefore, the model should be refined to provide brief explanation on the improvement initiatives, especially the main purpose of the initiatives (Interviewee A3). Other suggestion to improve the lower part of the model is as follow:

Balanced Scorecard is more about measurement, analysis and performance monitoring. Therefore, Balanced Scorecard would cover the following areas: (1) Strategic Planning, and (2) Measurement and analysis…Some of the initiatives (e.g. self assessment) should be conducted in all levels of BE maturity. (Interviewee B1)

7.3.2.3 Contingency factors to be considered in the selection of improvement initiatives

In term of contingency factors to be considered, Interviewee C1 has provided the following suggestions:

“Should include values / benefits of using the initiatives as one of the critical factors to be considered”.

“Factor number 3 should be changed from ‘suit with organisation’s direction’ to ‘suit with organisation’s direction and purpose’. What is important here is the organisation’s purpose”.

“Should include the external environment in which the organisation operates (PESTLE analysis) as one of the factors to be considered”.