EFQM Assessment Guide

EFQM Guide to Award Assessments
© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 1 of 49

EFQM Shares what works
For the past twenty years we have shared what works between our member organisations as a way to help
them implement their strategies: a mission which is as important as ever.
Through our network of members comprising private and public organisations of every size and sector,
many active around the world, EFQM applies its know-how and extracts outstanding approaches by
engaging with executives and front-line managers.
About this document

The EFQM User Guides are designed to help member organisations by giving examples of common
approaches, techniques and methods which support the practical deployment of the EFQM Excellence
Model. We have developed them in response to feedback from a number of our members; using their
knowledge and experience to identify approaches commonly used within our member organisations.
The EFQM Excellence Model is non-prescriptive and there are many different approaches that can help you
on your journey towards excellence – the challenge is finding the one that works best within your
organisation. The aim of this guide is to give you a number of ideas to help inspire, based on the
experience of others.
This document is not intended to be a “definitive version” or to describe all the approaches possible within
this area. This document will be adapted and updated to incorporate new ideas and learning as EFQM
continues to share what works.
This document is in line with
This document is only for use within the EFQM membership.
© 2010 EFQM

Contents
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 4
2. What a good assessment look like? .................................................................................................................... 5
3. Roles in the assessment process ........................................................................................................................ 6
4. Assessment process map .................................................................................................................................... 7
5. Summary of deliverables .................................................................................................................................... 8
6. Assessment phase 1 – prior assessor briefing event ........................................................................................ 10
 Individual assessment .......................................................................................................................... 10
 Team formation ................................................................................................................................... 11
 Contact with applicant ......................................................................................................................... 12
 Contact with PSP ................................................................................................................................... 13
7. Assessment phase 2 – briefing event ................................................................................................................ 14
 Briefing event Wednesday .................................................................................................................... 14
 Understand applicant – understanding key information .................................................................... 15
 Establish site visit outline ..................................................................................................................... 16
 Meeting with applicant ........................................................................................................................ 17
8. Assessment phase 3 – prepare site visit ........................................................................................................... 19
9. Assessment phase 4 – site visit ......................................................................................................................... 20
 Opening meeting with senior management team ............................................................................... 20
 Site Visit ................................................................................................................................................ 21
 Consensus meeting and scoring ........................................................................................................... 22
 Closing meeting .................................................................................................................................... 23
10. Assessment phase 5 – post site visit & feedback .............................................................................................. 24
 Finalise FBR .......................................................................................................................................... 24
 Information for Jury ............................................................................................................................. 25
 Face-to-face feedback meeting ........................................................................................................... 26
Other topics
 Interview guide ................................................................................................................................................. 27
Appendices
 Site Visit subject card ............................................................................................................................................

1. INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this document is to guide EFQM trained assessors through EFQM Excellence Award
process. This guide describes the five key phases of the process. Each phase is divided in a number of steps.
For each step in the process you will find a general description together with key deliverables and desired
outcome. In addition we have listed what are the key inputs and outputs for each step. Input & outputs
could range from documents or other information, meetings, conference calls to presentations and reports.
Furthermore you will find a list of good practices and tools.
By now you have participated and passed the EFQM assessor training and are now qualified EFQM
Excellence Assessor. In other words you have gotten your assessors “driving licence” and are familiar with
the Fundamental concepts of Excellence, the EFQM Excellence model and RADAR and how to apply those
in order to provide valuable feedback.
If you desire to develop the key competencies of an Assessment Team Leader (ATL) we suggest that you
participate in the EFQM Master Assessor training which concentrates on building advanced skills for
Assessment Team Leader such as conduct highly efficient and effective assessments, obtain insights and
information that will allow your executive team to drive the future success of the organisation, understand
how to put your organisation’s performance into a global context, learn good practice for team formation,
leadership, information gathering and evaluation techniques in addition of effective ways of presenting key
messages, improve your facilitation and interview skills.
There are also other ways and methods available to conduct EFQM assessments. Not all assessments need
such an detailed and comprehensive approach to get value out of the assessment. EFQM assessments
should be aligned with the needs of the organisations.
In order to improve this document comments and additions together with good practices and tools you
have successfully used during your assessments are welcome. Please send those to
Samuli.pruikkonen@efqm.org
We wish you enjoyable assessment process!
The EFQM team

What a good assessment look like?
Applicant view
 Thorough understanding of the applicant organisation by the assessor team
 Holistic analysis of stakeholder insights, perceptions and achievements
 Helping understand the coherency and depth of strategy implementation.
 Analysing that enablers are effective and driving towards desired results
 Using such insights to conclude and target what changes/innovation will be needed to deliver
desired future performance within the timescales and time horizons of the market place
 Value adding and actionable verbal and written feedback
 Confidence and trust to the assessor team leading to a open and fair assessment
 That the assessors have a close and constructive dialogue with employees at all levels, there is a
strong impact on motivation
Assessor view
 Get learning opportunities from the applicant and assessor team members
 Personal development opportunities
 Be part of well balanced, multicultural and skilled team – team work
 Everybody in the team is pulling their weight
 Be exposed to multicultural and challenging environment
 To get the opportunity to assess and discover a well managed organisation
 You will be part of a prestigious and recognised community of assessors
EFQM view
 If above is fulfilled in EFQM’s view “we have a good assessment”

Roles in the assessment process
Assessment Team Leader:

 Facilitating team meetings
 Making the best use of everyone's knowledge, experience, and ability
 Helping everyone to fully participate
 Forming the strongest possible consensus including making sure that everyone's point of view is
fully heard and all objections and concerns are satisfied to the maximum extent practicable
 Meeting schedule and deliverable requirements
 The satisfaction of all working group members.
 Client management - managing the relationship with the Applicant and EFQM
Assessor Team Member

 Attending planned team meetings
 Completing working group assignments in a timely fashion
 Following working group meeting operating rules
 Fully participating in working group meetings
 Helping to facilitate the full participation of other working group members
 Helping to maintain the satisfaction of all working group members.
Process Support Person (PSP)

 Help communicate the EFQM Excellence model 2010 and process requirements
 Help ensure consistency, within and across teams
 Support Team Leaders according to their needs
 Carries out regular reviews with the ATLs
 Report progress and learning at key milestones
 Review and release the feedback report
 Reflect back to the team any perceived inconsistencies in scoring
 Any other points agreed between the ATL and PSP

EFQM Assessment process
Prior 1.
2. 3
4.
Individual Contact
briefing assessment
Team
formation
Contact
with applicant
With PSP
phase
1.
Briefing Introduction &
2.
Understand
3 4.
Establish Meeting with
phase exercises
Applicant SV outline the applicant
Prepare 1.
site visit Prepare for
Site Visit
phase
Site Visit 1.
SMTM
2
Perform the
6.
Closing
phase meeting Site Visit meeting
(consensus+score
Post site 3. 2. 1.
visit & FTF Information Finalise
Feedback to Jury FBR
feedback
phase

EFQM Excellence Award - summary of assessment deliverables
Phase Step Key deliverables Expected outcome Who
P E Individual assessment • Key Information summary + understanding the • Each individual has basic All
R V context of applicants’ operations understanding of a
I E organisation and a list of
O N • Set of strengths & AFIs x 32 assumptions and questions to
R T be clarified
• Potential site visit subjects. • Team conference call 1
completed
Team formation • Belbin Team profile + previous experience and • Completed Belbin wheel Team
expertise
• Skills and experience / criterion ownership • Team conference call 2
preferences understood completed
Contact with applicant • Introductory call from ATL to applicant. Outline • ATL and the applicant have ATL
agenda for briefing event meeting agreed established confidence of
• Arrival times for be meeting agreed mutual cooperation
Contact with PSP • Introductory call from ATL to PSP • Any potential issues which may ATL / PSP
• PSP/ATL roles discussed and co-working emerge during the next steps
schedule agreed are identified
B E ATL briefing • ATL briefing • Each ATL understands what is ATL

R V expected from him/her
I E
E N Briefing event • Assessor briefing • Changes to the process are All
F T understood
I • Exercises • Team members understand All
N how they can best contribute
G • Team building & feedback to the team achievement
• Team members are capable to
assess 2010 Model All
Understand applicant • Applicant profile – Key Information Team is confident that they Team
• Strategic challenges and context have understood the
• List of clarification issues including scope of the applicants and its strategic
assessment challenges -> presentation
• List of site visit subjects
• Prepare presentation
• Main aspect of site visit agenda
Meeting with applicant • Agreed applicant profile and scope • Team demonstrates their Team
• Managing applicant’s expectations, logistics understanding of the
etc. organisation and openness to
• Working plan before site visit agreed complementary information
• Presentation (rehearse with
PSP)
Establish SV outline • Final list of site visit subjects • Team is confident they have Team
• Site visit agenda workable site visit outline ->
presentation
P V Prepare site visit • Regular contact with the applicant • Site visit plan is conformed to Team
R I • Agreed site visit plan (overall, day, session, list teams’ expectations and is
E S of SVSs, logistics) workable for the applicant
P I • Interview themes & questions
A T are identified
R • Overall, day and session
E schedules completed
Prepare site visit • Progress call ATL to PSP • Any potential issues which may ATL / PSP

emerge during the next steps
are identified
S V Opening meeting with • The purpose of the assessment and plan of the • Team to set the scene for the Team /
I I senior management team site visit site visit Applicant
T S • Additional information on
E I • Questions on high level strategic SVS applicant and its strategic
T challenges could be gathered
Site Visit • Gathering evidence, both tangible and • Necessary evidence leading to Team /
intangible x 32 valuable and actionable Applicant
feedback is gathered
• Mirror meeting undertaken, any contentious • Each team member is
issues or miss placed expectations tested responsible for sharing his/her
findings
• Evidence shared within team and turned into • Mirror meeting performed
criterion feedback and business “insights” • Linkages between detailed
feedback and strategic
challenges have emerged
Consensus meeting & • Team consensus based on evidence x 32 with • Team is to arrive at a Team
agree scores 2-6 strengths and 2-6 AFIs in all x 32 consensus on the
organisations’ strengths and
AFIs
• Related RADAR scoring • Team to produce value adding
and actionable feedback report
with scores that reflect the
statements
Closing meeting • Communicate high level findings (fundamental • Team to present the high level Team /
concepts or key themes). manage expectations feedback Applicant
P V Finalise FBR • Executive summary (Fundamental Concepts or • Team to produce executive Team
O I Key Themes AND future aspects) summary which conveys the
S S key messages
T I • Criterion part feedback • Team to produce value adding
T and actionable feedback report
• PSP queries (see right) either addressed in with scores that reflect the
revised report or appended as notes to jury statements
• PSP to review and provide
• ATL to finalise the report and send to EFQM suggestions for improvement
and raise queries if scoring
logic not linked to paper
analysis
• Completed report to EFQM
Information for Jury • Executive summary • Accurate information is ATL /

• Role model areas provided to the Jury Team
• Scores • PSP review done
• PSP comments/notes
Face-to-face • Clarify any question • The applicant has understood ATL (Team
feedback meeting • Elaborate and clarify the key business and taken ownership of the view)
“insights” feedback
• Report back to EFQM any applicant concerns

PHASE: PRIOR BRIEFING EVENT
STEP: INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT
Description
The main purpose of this step is to create an individual analysis based on the submission
document and other information sources. Start working from the Key information towards more
detailed strengths and areas for improvements and list any subjects you consider as key to be
explored during the assessment (site visit subjects). This way each team member will have a
complete view of the applicant organisation and each of the criterion parts.
By doing this work upfront we optimise the time during the assessor briefing event and the rest of
the assessment.
Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Input
 Submission document
 Key information
 75 page or Qualification file & Enabler map
 Additional Applicant info e.g. from search on internet
 EFQM Excellence model 2010 and the Fundamental Concepts
 Output
 Key Information summary
o Context – what to keep in mind
o Strategic challenges
 Site visit subjects, subjects that need to be further investigated during the site
visit
 Set of Strengths & AFIs for each criterion part (3-5 per criterion part)
 Drafting in depth detailed Strengths & AFIs is not always possible with
qualification and enabler map
 Please note: no scoring is done at this stage of the process
 Team conference call 1 completed to ensure tasks above have been completed
 Players
 Coordinated and managed by the Assessment Team Leader
 Assessment Team Members
 Good Practices & Tools

 Feedback report template
 Site visit subject card
 Presentation

STEP: TEAM FORMATION
Description
The main purpose why this step is to:
 decide on how to best to utilise the competencies and team characteristics of each
assessor for example in assigning criterion ownership
 Experience has shown that most if not all cases where problems were apparent in the
effectiveness and/or efficiency of the mission to accomplish; there was a clear cause to
be found in the team dynamics. E.g. the consensus and scoring process taking too much
time, can give for some team members a bad experience and can generate a negative
impact on the quality of the feedback. Therefore this step is critical for the success of
the team during the whole assessment process.

 Input
 Individual and team Belbin profiles
 Assessor profiles
 Output
 Understanding of individual and team Belbin profiles (team strengths and
weaknesses)
 Skills and experience / criterion ownership preferences understood
 Overview of relevant experience in the team subject matter expertise, language
competencies
 Completed Belbin wheel
 Team introductory presentation
 Players
 Coordinated and managed by the Assessment Team Leader
 Assessment Team Members
Good Practices & Tools

 Belbin profiles will be distributed by EFQM
 Team introductory presentation template
 Unique contribution to the team e.g.
 Deputy team leader
 Help find consensus in difficult times
 Help helicopter up when deep in details
 Help finalise feedback report

STEP: CONTACT WITH THE APPLICANTS REPRESENTATIVE
Description
The purpose of this step is to establish established confidence of mutual cooperation between the
assessor team and the applicant and to discuss first practical steps of the assessment according to
a good client management practices.

 Input
 Introductory call from ATL to Applicant
 Output
 ATL and the applicant have established confidence of mutual cooperation
 Outline agenda for briefing event meeting agreed
 Additional or specific material you want the applicant to bring to the
briefing event meeting
 Arrival times for the meeting to be agreed
 Players
 Assessment Team Leader
 Applicant representative

 Make the call after you have had the first team conference call and a common
high level understanding of the applicant organisation

STEP: FIRST CONTACT WITH PROCESS SUPPORT PERSON (PSP)
Description
The purpose of this step is to establish the roles of ATL and PSP and agree on what parts of the
process the ATL might need the most help. Also discuss and agree co-working schedule for the
entire process.

 Input
 Introductory call from ATL to PSP
 Output
 PSP & ATL roles are discussed and site visit schedule agreed for the entire
process
 Players
 Assessment Team Leader
 PSP

 Make the call after you have had the first team conference call and call with the
applicant

PHASE: BRIEFING EVENT
STEP: BRIEFING EVENT PART 1
Description
The purpose of this step is first of all to brief all the Assessment Team Leaders in order to act and
execute the assessment process in a consistent way. Further the briefing event will include team
building and exercises since most of the assessors are meeting face to face for the first time. The
second part of the event I devoted on team work on the applicant in order to prepare for the
meeting with the applicant representatives. Before leaving the event each team need to have a
robust project plan covering the rest of the process.

 Input
 ATL briefing
 Assessor briefing
 Exercises, Team building & feedback
 Output
 Each ATL understands what is expected from him/her
 Changes to the process are understood
 Team members understand how they can best contribute to the team
achievement
 How to assess with 2010 in mind understood
 Players
 Assessment Team Leader and Assessors
 EFQM
 PSP



STEP: BRIEFING EVENT PART 2 – UNDERSTAND APPLICANT ORGANISATION
Description
The aim of this step is to:
 obtain and document a high level strategic understanding of the organisation of the
applicant for ongoing use throughout the process
 prepare a presentation of this understanding you have as a team, that can be
tested/confirmed with the applicant representative during the meeting
 conclude any key points of organisational understanding (not performance assessment)
that you may need to clarify with the applicant representative
 agree on the team’s view of the scope of the Assessment to confirm or adapt with the
applicant representative
 Remember fully understanding your applicant’s business/activity is the key to a
successful and strategically relevant award assessment and historically, if not attained,
has been a main source of applicant dissatisfaction.

 Input
 Homework
 Applicant profile – key Information
o Keep in back of the mind during whole assessment
o Strategic challenges
o Questions to be answered
 Site visit subjects
 Strengths and AFIs (high level)
 List of clarification issues including scope of the assessment
 Output
 Team is confident that they have understood the applicants’ business and its
strategic challenges
 Presentation (prepared and rehearsed)
 Players
 PSP
 (EFQM)

 Presentation template

STEP: BRIEFING EVENT PART 3 – ESTABLISH SITE VISIT OUTLINE
Description
A key objective of the Assessor Team Briefing event is to conclude teams’ initial view and
agreement to the key site visit subjects (SVS) that you want to pursue with the Applicant during
the assessment. Based on the site visit subject list a further objective is to begin to plan an outline
for the Site Visit approach (for discussion with the Applicant Representative during the meeting).
The site visit planning is an iterative process, it starts by exploring different scenario’s and the
limits of what will be possible and then build a team consensus on the overall site visit approach to
select.

 Input
 Proposals/scenarios for the overall approach
 Prioritised list of site visit subjects
 Output
 Team is confident they have workable site visit outline -
 Presentation – part 2 (prepared and rehearsed)
 Players
 PSP
 (EFQM)

 Presentation template – part 2

STEP: BRIEFING EVENT PART 4 – MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT
Description
The purpose of the Applicant representatives visit is to establish a positive spirit of cooperation
between the applicant and the assessing team
 aligning the initial view the team has reached by now on the organisation’s profile,
based on the submission document and correct or clarify further where needed.
 setting the expectations by the applicant about the site visit by helping them to
understand how to best prepare for the site visit, including an agenda for the SMTM
meeting and any specific information the team may request to have available when
they arrive on site, etc
 All enabling the assessing team to plan for and carry out the site visit

 Input
 Agreed applicant profile and scope
 Managing applicant’s expectations, logistics etc.
 Interworking before site visit agreed (milestones, calls etc.)
 Output
 Team demonstrates their understanding of the organisation and openness to
complementary information
 Presentation (rehearse with PSP)
 Players
 PSP
 (EFQM)

 Presentation template – part 2

STEP: BRIEFING EVENT CLOSING AND NEXT STEPS
Description
The purpose it to have a project plan that outlines all the tasks that need to be done prior the site
visit with time scales, owner, agree conference call dates etc.

 Input
 Team work input that has been achieved until now
 Input from the meeting with the applicants’ representatives
 Output
 Project plan with milestones
 Conference call dates agreed
 Players
 PSP
 (EFQM)

PHASE: SITE VISIT PREPARATION
STEP: PREPARE SITE VISIT
Description
The purpose this step is to:
 confirm logistics needed to make the site visit to happen
 distribute to team members a plan that defines who they will meet, where and when to
collect the evidence for all agreed SVSs
 All this enables the assessing team to be ready to travel to a site of the applicant and
carry out the site visit.

 Input
 Regular contact with the applicant to agreed interworking plan
 Agreed site visit plan (overall, day, session, SVS, logistics, questions)
 Progress call from ATL to PSP
 Output
 Site visit plan is conformed to teams’ expectations and is workable for the
applicant
 Interview themes & questions are identified
 Overall, day and session schedules are completed
 Any potential issues which may emerge during the next steps are identified (ATL
/ PSP call)
 Players
 PSP
 (EFQM)

PHASE: SITE VISIT
STEP: OPENING MEETING WITH APPLICANTS SENIOR MANAGEMENT TEAM
Description
The purpose of the meeting with the SMTM is:
 to enable the establishment of a positive spirit of cooperation between the applicant
executive managers and the assessing team
 to gain strategic insights and understand executive manager roles and dependencies
 be aware of any recent changes of importance of achievements not yet known by the
team
 to fine tune plans for the rest of the week if needed

 Input
 The purpose and plan of the visit
 Questions on high level strategic SVS
 Output
 Team to set the scene for the site visit
 Additional information on applicants’ business and its strategic challenges could
be gathered
 Players
 Applicants senior management team

 Opening meeting presentation template

PHASE: SITE VISIT
STEP: SITE VISIT
Description
The purpose of the site visit is to:
 gain insights on site of the applicant on the Site Visit Subjects as defined by the team
 share and evaluate these insights obtained with supporting evidence to be able to
create the basis of value
 give a professional impression to the applicant in “being an ambassador” of the EFQM
 The site visit really is the “core” element of the whole process, all previous steps were
meant to be prepared for this, and it is the main source to build the feedback for the
applicant and input for the Jury in the next steps

 Input
 Gathering evidence, both tangible and intangible x 32
 Mirror meeting undertaken, any contentious issues or miss placed expectations
tested
 Evidence shared within team and turned into criterion feedback and business
“insights”
 Output
 Necessary evidence leading to valuable and actionable feedback is gathered
 Each team member is responsible for sharing his/her findings
 Linkages between detailed feedback and strategic challenges have emerged
 Players
 Applicants employees at all levels

 See interview guide
 Site visit subject card
 Site visit planning templates

PHASE: SITE VISIT
STEP: CONSENSUS MEETING & SCORING
Description
One potential way of working for the consensus meeting is outlined below
 The owner for each criterion/part presents an overview of their analysis, including:
 A brief summary of the Criteria requirements
 Their proposed Strengths/AFIs – noting specific points for debate
 Proposed scoring range
 Their view on Key Themes
 The team discusses:
 Any omissions or errors in the analysis
 Consensus score (number and radar profile)
 Any needed text changes that the criterion owner may subsequently draft
for the feedback report
 The owner for the criterion/criterion part summarises
As outcome of the consensus meeting the feedback report should be 99% ready.

 Input
 Team consensus based on evidence x 32 with 2-6 strengths and 2-6 AFIS for all
criterion parts
 Related RADAR scoring
 Output
 Team is to arrive at a consensus on the organisations’ strengths and AFIs and
the executive summary
 Team to produce value adding and actionable feedback report with scores that
reflect the statements
 Players

 Scoring template

PHASE: SITE VISIT
STEP: CLOSING MEETING
Description
The purpose of this step is to communicate the high level findings using fundamental concepts or
key themes as a framework to the applicant. Whilst remaining on the high level findings the
feedback should provide early actionable points to the applicant. The team needs to be 100%
confident on the content of feedback provided.

 Input
 Communicate high level findings (fundamental concepts or key themes).
 Manage expectations and clarify next steps
 Output
 Team to present the key high level feedback
 Scores or potential recognition level are not subject for discussion at this point
of time
 Players

 Closing meeting template
 Thank you for openness, co-operation, etc.
 Reinforce consensus process and unanimity of team
 Deliver high level feedback on against Fundamental concepts or Key
themes
 Reinforce willingness to answer questions for understanding

PHASE: POST SITE VISIT
STEP: FINALISING THE FEEDBACK REPORT
Description
The purpose of the step is to finalise the feedback report that was drafted during the consensus
meeting. The team will get feedback from the PSP on the content on the report which needs to be
taken into account while finalizing the report and before it is send to EFQM.

 Input
 Executive summary (Fundamental Concepts / Key Themes AND future aspects)
 Criterion part feedback
 PSP queries/comments either addressed in revised report or appended as notes
to jury
 PSP to proof read the report
 Output
 Team to produce executive summary which conveys the key business messages
 Team to produce value adding and actionable feedback report with scores that
reflect the statements
 PSP to proof read and provide suggestions for improvement and raise queries if
scoring logic not linked to analysis
 PSP to proof read and check for consistency
 ATL to finalise the report and send to EFQM
 Players
 PSP
 EFQM

STEP: INFORMATION TO THE JURY
Description
The purpose of this step is to provide consistent information to the Jury enabling them to make
robust and sound decisions on the final recognition levels.

 Input
 Executive summary
 Role model areas
 Scores
 Any PSP comments/notes as described in previous step
 Output
 Accurate information is provided to the Jury
 PSP to proof read and check for consistency
 ATL to send the complete set of information to EFQM
 Players
 PSP
 EFQM

 Jury information templates

STEP: FACE-TO-FACE FEEDBACK MEETING
Description
The purpose of this step is to close the client management phase between the assessor team and
the applicant. Below you will find some good practice examples on how potential topics for the
meeting. Please note; any of the topics below can be used in a positive way or a way to inform and
give ideas to the applicant on what to improve.
 What was unique in the organisation
 Based on Fundamental Concepts of EFQM Model
 Achieved excellent results
 Strong link to one, two or three criterion parts
 Never seen before by whole team and not in “Good Practice Data Base”
 Which seem to be a clear success factor
 Recognised as best practise by
 Science, Academics
 Awards, Prizes and other recognitions received
 Excellent results which are direct linked to this approach
 Common understanding e.g. TPS (Toyota Production System)
 Supports and focus strategy in an outstanding way
 Clear link to make strategy come true
 Results which are clearly caused by certain approaches
 Brings operative success
 Works also as in good times also in difficult hard times
 Seen by the assessor team as excellent
 Delights in an outstanding way the stakeholders of the organisation

 Input
 Clarify any questions from the applicant
 Elaborate and clarify the key business “insights”
 Report back to EFQM any applicant concerns
 Output
 Make sure that the applicant has understood and taken ownership of the
feedback
 Players
 Assessment Team Leader (and one additional assessors if needed)
 Applicant representatives

 Agree agenda for the meeting before hand

 Ask the applicant to send the points they want to discuss prior the meeting so
that the ATL can get input from the team members in timely manner

Interview Guide
Site Visit Subjects

Do/are
– subjects that can be explored during one or more site visit sessions
– directly link to RADAR elements (see the SVS check card)
– link RADAR aspects of both enablers and results where possible
– lead after the site visit session to the creation and/or
confirmation/update of one or more STR and/or AFI statements
Do not/are not
– a question, but they do lead to a set of questions for a SV session
– a STR or AFI statement, but they do lead to STRs or AFIs
– A way to fully understand a system or approach
Site Visit Subjects need to translated into interview plans

Master Assessor Training 2010 v1.1
RADAR –Every word matters
RESULTS: APPROACH:
 Relevance and usability  Sound
 Scope & Relevance  Integrated
 Integrity
 Segmentation
 Performance
 Trends
 Targets
 Comparisons DEPLOYMENT:
 Causes  Implemented
 Systematic
ASSESSMENT AND REFINEMENT:

 Measurement
 Learning & Creativity
 Innovation & Improvement

But all in the context of the Applicant
The
Organisation
being assessed
The
Assessment
The EFQM Process
Excellence RADAR
Model Apply together (Assessment Tool)
( Framework)
Master Assessor Training 2010 v1.1 4
Use Key Information to frame the

assessment & feedback
During the assessment For the Feedback
Assumptions on the
organisations’ business Refined understanding of
and its strategic strategic challenges
challenges
Elements of Elements of
Context for Context for
Site visit subjects Key Themes
Detailed questions Detailed feedback

Site Visit Subject Cards
• Add latest SVS cards
Interviewing High Performers
• High Performing Organisations are very likely to score over 500

points
• In one sense, your job is to decide how much over 500 points –
always remembering the context and strategic challenges of the
organisation
• What impact should this have on the style of the assessment?

High Performing Organisations
Assessment of a high performing organisation = ?

– Testing strategy deployment
– Assessing the organisation’s capability to “sense and respond” to
change
– Sustainability
– A and R = learning and change/innovation to deliver future
performance
– Degree of embedding a Culture based on the Fundamental Concepts
of Excellence
– Relevance of the Results
– Pitfall = acting only at a low operational level
Sources of Information and Data
Key sources include…..

 Management and Process Information .
 Performance data.
 Interviews with individuals – useful for questions that are specific to the individual
concerned ,(e.g. “As the owner of this process, tell me how you measurement the
effectiveness of it?”)
 Discussions with groups – useful for questions applying to several/many people (e.g.
“Tell me communications happens in this department?”)
But do not forget others…

 Internal Communications, e.g. Notice boards/E-Mail/Intranet/Internet etc.
 Meeting records.
 Presentations.
 Press Coverage.

Does the 80/20 Rule apply?
 80% of the Subjects to be planned will be the same for every Site Visit, but
the focus will vary depending on the organisation’s context.
For example:
The Performance Appraisal Process, Management Information System, Target Setting
Process, Internal Communications Process, Reward & Recognition Schemes etc……..
 80% of the “jobholders” to be interviewed will be the same for every Site
Visit.
For example:
The Senior Management Team members, HR manager, Finance Manager, IT Manager,
Strategy/Business Planning manager, selection of “Discussion groups”, selection of Process
Owners etc…………
Discussion: Is this true and If yes, or partially yes, how does this effect SV planning?
Good Interview Practice

Be clear on the Site Visit Subjects Opening:
 Put at ease and introduce
Define a series of Questions
 Provide an overview of interview plan, roles and needs
 Explain answers are non attributable (if relevant)
Develop a “hypothesis” as you
receive answers Body of interview:
 Begin with a question that encourages rapport building
In real time add further  Mix open and closed questions according to need
questions to test the hypothesis
 Listen and react
 Use controlled silence
Test final conclusions before you
leave the interview/group Closing:
discussion  Summarise and test conclusions that have emerged
 Thank and agree next steps
Agree next steps If any

Main question types
Type Advantages Disadvantages

Closed  In control  Do not get detailed
insights/views
(typically lead to a  Gets to facts quickly
yes/no response)  Can discourage
 Good for testing and
dialogue
summarising
Open  Provides detailed  Time control may be
insights lost
(Include words such as –
where, what, why,  Builds rapport  Can appear intrusive
when, how, who) (Why do you…?)
Interviewing Good Practice -Opening
• Plan the opening carefully, it may determine the interview’s success or

failure
• Make direct eye contact
• Accept coffee or beverage – only if time permits
• Provide an overview of the interview structure / your needs
• Let the interviewee know that the interview is non-attributable, and
that you will be taking notes only to facilitate consolidation of findings.

Interview Good Practice –Body of meeting
• Identify what you need
• Listen! Avoid the tendency to fill the interview with the sound of
your own voice
• Begin with non-threatening questions that encourage discussions
• Communicate a sense of interest, verbally and non-verbally. (Be
genuine!)
• Avoid leading questions
• Use a mixture of open and closed questions as appropriate to the
issue in hand
• Manage topic transitions. (Keep the interview moving to your
agenda and timescales)
Interview Good Practice -Closing
• The interview should close in such a way as to have a positive

impact on the perception of yourself and your team
• Make a definite statement indicating that the interview has closed
• Provide a brief summary of what has been accomplished
• Express appreciation for the interviewee’s time, interest, etc
• State it any further information would help
• Agree precise deadlines and mechanisms for acceptance of further
information, if appropriate
• Make no comment whatsoever on the likely scoring impact of your
debate

Views of a communication expert
7% of meaning is in the words that are spoken.
38% of meaning is paralinguistic - the way the words are said.
55% of meaning is in facial expression.
Professor Emeritus of Psychology, Albert Mehrabian, UCLA
Discussion Group Good Practice
 Ask for an informal setting (round table, or grouped chairs with assessors sitting with
participants).
 Explain purpose at start.
 Make, and ask, for short introductions.
 Explain all inputs are non attributable (confidentiality) and the purpose of any notes
you make.
 Keep as informal as possible and stimulate/facilitate discussion.
 Write topics/questions on a flip chart , (particularly if language is an issue).
 Put an ease, use a simple question to establish early rapport.
 Seek inputs from all participants.
 At the end thank all participants and ask them if there is anything else anyone would
like to ask or say.
 Consider using as a final question “What is the one thing you would like to see
improved here?”, particularly if discussion responses have generally been positive.

Interviewing and Discussion Group Pitfalls
 Cultural mis-matches.
 Poor body language (threatening, lack of interest, insulting).
 Spoken language (where translation is needed, try to ensure you get translations,
not interpretations!)
 Asking ‘leading’ questions (“Would you agree that things can be improved around
here?”)
 Knowing best (“In my company we…..”)
 Not listening (We have two ears and only one mouth….)
 Lack of preparation for the interview.
 Poor timekeeping.
 Lack of objectivity (“I’ve seen that approach elsewhere. It never seems to work.” )
 Expressing views (“I think that’s a great approach”.)
How do you see the organisation?
Try to remain objective!

One positive experience does not
mean everything is positive!
One negative experience does not
mean everything is negative!

Knowing when and how to stop…
Push Pull
Few Examples Warehouse
How do you overcome these Dilemmas?
1. The person being interviewed gives a generic answer that doesn’t

answer the question.
2. Sometimes the person being interviewed will say what they think
you want to hear.
3. The interviewee may become defensive or embarrassed
4. In Focus Groups, one person may dominate or influence the views
of the group.
5. Inappropriate behaviours by the assessors, e.g. not being sensitive
to the person being interviewed, being overly dominant, etc.
6. Losing control of the “agenda” and valuable time.
7. Not making good notes on what you learn / discover.

Competent Communicators are…
– Listening
– Reframing
– Argumentation
– Persuading
–?
–?

Cultural Issues in Assessments
Culture
What is culture?
• ‘Culture or civilisation, taken in its wide ethnographic sense, is
that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art,
morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits
acquired by man as a member of society’ (Tylor)
• ‘Culture in all its meanings and with all its affiliated concepts,
is situational’ (Blommaert)
How can cultural issues effect Assessments?
– We may not respect the cultural norms of our Applicant
– We may assess in a way that is culturally biased by our
own norms or stereotypes.
How can we minimise Cultural risks?
• Understand our own and the Applicants culture
• Move away from ethnocentric positions:

- “we are all basically the same”
- “business is business in any country”
- “my frame of reference is right”

Ask about the ways of greeting…
• Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands?

– Ask for Applicant preferences and local insights, e.g. in
Germany, its always shake hands, firmly but briefly.
• Forms of Address
– Ask again for preferences and local insights, e.g. in some
German organisations it often practice to use professional
titles after Mr. or Mrs. In Russia, it’s appropriate, when
meeting someone, to simply state your family name without
any additional greeting.
– Unless suggested by the Applicant, never use first names and
don’t suggest to be called by yours.
Try to stop stereotypical thinking…
A stereotype is a standardised mental picture that represents

an oversimplified opinion, prejudiced attitude or uncritical
judgment.
-Example: She’s like that because she’s Asian.
What are the dangers if team members hold stereotypes?

Avoiding stereotypical behaviours
• Avoid ‘essentialism’ (i.e. assuming a set of properties

as common to all members of a group/Applicant)
• Avoid ‘reductionism’ (i.e. identifying a single
property as particular to a whole group/Applicant)
• Have a team rule to challenge it when you see it
Will noise/filters exist?
“Shannon and Weaver’s” Model of Communication:

Communication as a process of transmitting information
message medium received message

information transmitter
source receiver destination
Noise/filters
“Shannon and Weaver’s” Model of Communication: Communication as a

process of transmitting information

EFQM RADAR Guideline Site Visit Subject (SVS) card
Enablers
Attributes Seek evidence in order to get confidence that ...
Element
Approach Sound:  ... there is a reason to support the choice of the approaches in place – what was the rationale behind choosing and/or adapting a
 approach has a clear rationale specific approach, for instance by means of research or benchmarking;
 approach has defined processes  ... an approach is well described/documented in a way appropriate for those needing to understand it as a process, e.g. is it
 approach focuses on stakeholder needs visualised, did the ‘way of working’ change over time, how and why was it automated etc.;
 refinements have been embedded  ... an approach is focussed on the expectations of everyone involved in the execution of it;
in the approach over time
(both strategic and operational – e.g. those who benefit from and also those who use the approaches);
 ... the approach already shows signs of maturity or is a proven practice, e.g. because the changes made to it became smaller over
time, or the approach has been shown to work also in abnormal or difficult circumstances.
Integrated:  ... one or a set of approaches are designed to deliver the desired results (now and in the future),
 approach supports strategy  ... there is a visible/logical link with the strategy, and the approach supports one or more objective;
 approach is linked to other approaches  ... the people choosing an approach are aligning it with one or more facets of the strategy, while also considering dependencies
as appropriate from and/or impact on other approaches.
Deployment Implemented:  ... a view exists on the extent to which an approach has been used and is put into practice. This may relate to different levels within
 approach is implemented in relevant areas an organisation’s hierarchy; different locations; the number of actual implementations based on an approach; the number of
employees actively involved or the various products or services being offered;
 ... there is an awareness of the further potential for deployment in depth or breadth;
 ... some facts & figures exist to show how often an approach is used, how the use has varied over time and why.
Systematic:  ... there is a plan and timing for the actual deployment (is it a simple or complex project ?);
 approach is deployed in a timely, structured  ... the implementation of this plan ‘on time’ (maybe too slow or too fast ?);
way and with the ability to manage changes in  ... example(s) exist where the circumstances required temporary or definitive evolutions, small or big.
the environment if needed
Assessment Measurement:  ... there is a view for a specific approach on the effectiveness (achieving the desired output)
and  regular measurement of the effectiveness and efficiency (how much resource, time, money is consumed);
Refinement and efficiency of the approach and its  ... these two aspects are used as a ‘measure’ in one way or another, and are linked to each other;
deployment are carried out  ... there is a way to know how frequently this should be done, what period is a ‘good fit’ for measuring.
 Measures selected are appropriate
Learning & Creativity:  ... actions resulting in better understanding are undertaken in the field of knowledge needed for a particular approach (this within
 Learning is used to identify internal and the organisation, sector, but also outside);
external good practices and improvement  ... there is knowledge resulting from these learning activities and comparisons that include e.g if the selected approach in use can be
opportunities considered as ‘outdated’, ‘normal’, ‘better’ or ‘best in class’;
 Creativity is used to generate new or changed  ... there is an awareness of the potential for further improvement (incremental or radical breakthrough)
approaches
Innovation & Improvement:  ... the measurement and learning from above lead to real improvements and are visible in the results,
 output from measurement and learning is it is clear that without the measurement and learning the performance would be lower;
analysed and used to identify, prioritise, plan  ... which innovative ideas and big or small changes have already or will ‘make a difference’;
and implement improvements  ... there is a way to select and only act on the best ideas and proposals, not on all of them, e.g. based on the understanding of the
 Output from creativity is evaluated, limitations in time, resource and capabilities when translating ideas to practice.
prioritised and used

Results
Element Attributes `
Relevance Scope & Relevance:  ... the organisation is clear about what it needs to measure/achieve/manage to deploy its strategy and understand its impact on
& Usability  The scope of the Results presented: stakeholders perceptions, see how the selection and prioritisation of results is decided upon
* Addresses the needs and  ... the prioritised measures/results presented and used are meaningful within the context of Strategy
expectations of relevant stakeholders  ... when using the results to understand ‘the footprint’ and performance of the organisation, what is the way to make a difference
* Is consistent with the strategy and between the essential, not so essential and non-important results to look at
policies of the organisation
 ... what kind of understandable and useful insights exist on how the various results are related to each other,
 The most important results are
identified and prioritised as Key results e.g. which weak or strong influences exist, is a relationship linear or of another type, is there a time delay etc.
 Relationships between relevant results  ... if both the effectiveness and efficiency aspects exist, if there is awareness of how these correlate/inter-relate
are understood
Integrity:  ... what is ‘on time’, ‘too soon’ or ‘too late’ for a specific result
 Results are timely, reliable and accurate  ... to what extent for a specific result there is a view on the consistency, completeness or any other quality aspects of the data and
information used as source
 ... if the precision of the information used and needed are in line or very different from each other
Segmentation:  ... what the reason for a specific segmentation is when analysing performance/achievements in a specific field
 Results are appropriately segmented  ... when seeing the differences per segment if this leads to actionable conclusions and insights
 ... if the segmentations used create a strongly discriminating analysis, help to show sharp and significant differences
Performance Trends:  ... what the evolution over time demonstrates, is the performance improving, stabilising or degrading?
 trends are positive and/or  ... if this trend is in line with the ‘desired’ trend and in line with strategic objectives
there is sustained good performance  ... a specific trend is stronger, comparable or weaker than other relevant trends in the sector, how steep or fast
Targets:  ... for a specific key result, in one way or another, a desired level to be achieved exists and is understood. This can be a specific %age
 are set for key results higher or lower, but also in a ‘band’ between two levels
 are appropriate  ... when this desired future performance level for a specific result is clear, what is or was the rationale behind agreeing to that specific
 are achieved level, why not a bit or a lot higher or lower?
 ... how close in reality these desired levels of performance are (almost) achieved or surpassed, or not at all,
and how that leads again to adapting the targets for the future
Comparisons:  ... if there is (starting with the most important results) an awareness of similar measures used by ‘others’, within or outside of the
 are made for key results sector or organisation
 are appropriate  ... to what extent the information to compare with is valid, can be trusted, is easy to use etc.
 are favourable  ... what can be demonstrated, what does the comparison say about a specific measure, is it a bit or much better, maybe even ‘the
best’, or just in the same range, or a bit/ a lot worse, and how this impacts target setting
 ... if out of the comparison further credibility and/or confidence can be allocated to specific achievements
Note: competitor and industry averages may be used but for strong role model organisations, these will also show comparisons with best-in-class or world-
class, they can show they ‘are the benchmark’, they perform at a level others would like to be.
Causes:  … what the insights gained are concerning cause-effect, e.g. what change in one or more approaches has made a significant difference,
 the relationship between Results which ones not so, or which result would never have been achieved without one or more specific actions, projects, initiatives etc.
achieved and their Enablers is  … for on-going changes and/or deployment of a specific approach in what field(s) a sign of improvement is expected, or why a
understood fall-back to previous or lower levels of performance is very unlikely to happen;
 based on the evidence presented, there  … for which results there is a high level of trust and strong ability to convince others that the gains achieved in performance will
is confidence that positive performance
be kept, what is the probability it will further improve or stabilise.
will be sustained in the future
 … how much certainty exists in predicted performance, why would it be a surprise if a target is not achieved?

OVERVIEW OF THE EFQM MASTER ASSESSOR COMPETENCIES
The table below provides a summary of the ‘Master’ level for the Assessor Competencies.
# Competency Area „Master‟ Competency description
1 Technical Can help others in understanding the Fundamental Concepts & Criteria.
Which means the candidate is able to explain and transfer the thinking embedded into
on EFQM Model the EFQM model and the Fundamental Concepts, is able to answer challenging
questions on these topics, and knows benefits of real life ‘excellence in practice ...’
examples.
2 Technical Can help others in the understanding and application of RADAR.

Which means the candidate is able to quickly identify the right RADAR elements and
on RADAR see weaknesses in scoring profiles made by other team members, and can ‘influence’
during consensus a consistent scoring profile, and can resolve the differences in a
team, e.g. by focusing on 1 specific RADAR element or attribute.
3 Business Can make valuable use of Key Information and understand Strategies.
Which means the candidate is able to grab the contextual (market), strategic and
financial dynamics of the organization being assessed, e.g. can explain business
models for different sectors, or can participate in a conversation on the financial
aspects and clarify the scope of an assessment project.
4 Teamwork & Can act as a “Team Leader”, “Deputy Leader” or “Criterion owner”.
Professionalism Which means the candidate is able to apply consciously Belbin team roles (or a
similar concept) to identify and act upon opportunities to improve the ‘effectiveness
and efficiency’ of a Team. He/she can finish Tasks in the team on time and as
expected, or acts constructively when a task is unclear or too hard to achieve.
This also includes the candidate is able to create, use and update time plans both on
the macro and micro level, he/she is able to apply project management concepts and
tools fit for the specific context of an assessment mission.
5 Communications, Can communicate effectively with a variety of people and in a diversity of

Interpersonal & circumstances.
Interviewing Which means the candidate has active listening capabilities and avoids to be
judgemental, has insight in his/her personal communication style and adopts it
consciously according to the circumstances, e.g. by taking into account cultural
diversity.
6 Analytical Can contribute to a valued overall and balanced picture through Analysis.
Which means the candidate is able to see how many different information sources
give an overall picture (connecting the dots), and can keep an ‘open mind’ for
surprising or different things even if at first sight they look familiar.
7 Report Writing & Can create and present feedback that is perceived valuable and unique.
Presentation Which means the candidate is able to produce understandable statements and
presentation material for variable levels, with content adapted to the expectations and
level of thinking of a specific target audience.

LIST OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE INDICATORS
Core Competency Positive Indicators Negative Indicators
 Identifies linkage between Fundamental Concepts and Model  Examples of confused understanding of FC/Model linkages.
1. Understands the EFQM Excellence Model – its Criteria/Criterion Parts.  Incorrect understanding of Model structure and/or content.
structure, content, dynamics and linkages to the  Shows understanding of the meaning and relevant content of each  Confused or little understanding of Model linkages.
Fundamental Concepts. Criterion Part.
 Identifies linkages between Enablers and corresponding Results,
and between linked Enablers.
 Shows clear understanding of the meaning of the RADAR elements  Examples of confused understanding of the RADAR elements.
2. Understands and effectively applies RADAR in and attributes.  Analysis is neither factual nor RADAR based.
order to produce accurate, fact based and  Uses RADAR understanding to produce relevant and factual  Scores are inappropriate to the analysis and/or are inconsistent.
value adding analysis. analysis
 Consistently scores correctly, producing appropriate scores.
 Shows clear understanding of the Key Information provided.  Examples of lack or confused understanding of one or more key
3. Understands the Key Information about the areas of information.
 Uses the Key Information in order to provide relevant and useful
organisation being assessed and uses it analysis.  Fails to use Key Information during analysis work
effectively to produce relevant, value adding  Provides analysis that is not relevant or useful to the organisation
analysis. being assessed.
 Encourages an environment of openness and trust.  Tries to promote self rather than the interests of the team.
4. Contributes effectively as an assessment team
 Demonstrates respect for colleagues by inviting and recognising  Shows lack of respect for team colleagues – not listening,
member conducting themselves at all times their contributions, listening, respecting team decisions, good time interrupting, poor time keeping, and disregarding team decisions.
both professionally and with integrity. keeping.  Fails to contribute in team exercises and discussions.
 Demonstrates skill in dealing with conflicts and disagreements within  Aggressive or confrontational approach to team disagreements.
the team.
 Demonstrates lack of professionalism in failing to complete work as
 Behaves professionally throughout the training - completing pre- requested, failing to apologise or take personal responsibility for
course work, training exercises and tests on time and as requested. shortcomings.
 Communicates clearly – both orally and in writing.  Poor English language skills – either written or oral, or both.
5. Communicates clearly and accurately in both
 Demonstrates empathy and understanding with others, particularly  Is rude or overbearing towards fellow participants, the tutors or the
spoken and written English, and demonstrates those from different cultures or backgrounds to their own. site visit exercise interviewee ‘role player’.
effective interpersonal and interviewing skills.  Uses effective questioning techniques, both during team and  Demonstrates confused questioning techniques during the site visit
plenary discussions and in the site visit ‘mock’ interview exercise. exercise, and during the training generally.
 Demonstrates understanding of information and data and ability to  Inability to identify and understand relevant information and data.
6. Assimilates and understands relevant retain and see connections between it.  Contradictory or muddled analysis.
information and data related to the organisation  Shows ability to priories the importance of information and data and  Unable to cope with new or changed information and data.
being assessed, using it to produce clear, to use it to make a clear, logical and penetrating analysis
 Unable to formulate analysis at the macro (high) level.
accurate and insightful analysis at both macro  Demonstrates ability to take on board new or changed information
(big picture) and micro (detail) levels. and data and to review analysis in the light of this.
 Demonstrates ability to analysis at both macro and micro level.
 Puts emphasis on delivering value adding feedback  Produces feedback that is not value adding
7. Produces and delivers clear, accurate and
 Produces written feedback that is clear, accurate and value adding  Produces feedback that is consultative or judgemental (personal
value adding feedback, both in written and oral likes or dislikes) in character.
 Delivers feedback that may not be welcome with tact and empathy.
form.  Produces unclear, inaccurate or tactlessly presented feedback.
APPENDIX H - EFQM ASSESSOR TRAINING PERFORMANCE RECORD FOR…………………………………………………(Page 1 of 2)
Core Competency Summary of observed performance
1. Understands the EFQM Excellence Model – its

structure, content, dynamics and linkages to the
Fundamental Concepts.
2. Understands and effectively applies RADAR in order to

produce accurate, fact based and value adding analysis.
3. Understands the Key Information about the organisation

being assessed and uses it effectively to produce
relevant, value adding analysis.
4. Contributes effectively as an assessment team member

conducting themselves at all times both professionally
and with integrity.
5. Communicates clearly and accurately in both spoken

and written English, and demonstrates effective
interpersonal and interviewing skills.
6. Assimilates and understands relevant information and

data related to the organisation being assessed, using it
to produce clear, accurate and insightful analysis at both
macro (big picture) and micro (detail) levels.
7. Produces and delivers clear, accurate and value adding

feedback, both in written and oral form.
Pre-course Pre- Pre- Pre- Pre-course Model/ Key Key Assessment Team Site Visits Evening Providing Key
Performance Review Key course course course Model/ RADAR Information Themes Basics Working Exercise Test Feedback Themes
Information Key Analysis Scoring RADAR exercise Exercise Initial Exercise Exercise Exercise Exercise Final
Circle (or otherwise identify) the Themes Exercise Exercise Exercise
relevant R/Y/G or A/B/C/D R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G R/Y/G A /B /C /D R/Y/G R/Y/G
performance rating

APPENDIX H - EFQM ASSESSOR TRAINING PERFORMANCE RECORD FOR………………………………………………(Page 2 of 2)
Final Outcome (circle – or otherwise identify -one only): Pass Fail Further Development Needed
Suggested next development stages: Notes from Participant (if any)
Summary of any actions necessary to address a specific “Further development

needed” issue before a “Pass” may be entered onto the database:
I hereby agree to abide to the EFQM Code of Practice for

Excellence Assessors and the EFQM Assessor Register. I am
willing for my contact details to be published.
Signed (Tutor): Date: / / Signed (Participant): Date: / /

Name: Name:

Further information and feedback
For more information on the EFQM Excellence Model 2010, you can:
 Visit our website www.efqm.org for regularly updated information and a list of frequently asked questions
(FAQ List);
 Attend one of the EFQM Training Courses to learn how to assess using the Model or practically apply the
concepts of excellence within your organisation;
 Contact your EFQM Account Manager for further information on self-assessment tools, case studies and
other opportunities to get involved.
Improving this guide

This document is designed to evolve with feedback from our Members, Assessors and other stakeholders, based
on their practical experiences of applying the EFQM Excellence Model 2010.
After reading this guide, if you are eager to contribute your ideas on how we can improve this document, you
can do so by writing to us at info@efqm.org.
Get involved
The EFQM is a Membership organisation. We rely on input, ideas and suggestions from you to create a vibrant
community.
Through EFQM, there are numerous opportunities for you to engage in interactive discussions or activities on
this or other topics. For more information, please contact us at info@efqm.org.

EFQM
Avenue des Olympiades 2
1140 Brussels, Belgium
Tel: +32 2 775 35 11
Fax: +32 2 775 35 96
info@efqm.org
www.efqm.org
© EFQM 2009
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (be this
electronically, mechanically, through photocopy, or recording or otherwise) without either the prior written permission of, or a licence
permitting restricted copying, and use for a third party, from the publisher.

EFQM Assessment Guide

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EFQM Assessment Guide

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EFQM Guide to Award Assessments

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 1 of 49

About this document

This document is in line with

This document is only for use within the EFQM membership.

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 2 of 49

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 3 of 49

We wish you enjoyable assessment process!

The EFQM team

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 4 of 49

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 5 of 49

Assessment Team Leader:

Assessor Team Member

Process Support Person (PSP)

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 6 of 49

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 7 of 49

B E ATL briefing • ATL briefing • Each ATL understands what is ATL

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 8 of 49

Information for Jury • Executive summary • Accurate information is ATL /

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 9 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 10 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 11 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 12 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 13 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 14 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 15 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 16 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 17 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 18 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 19 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 20 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 21 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 22 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome

 Good Practices & Tools

© EFQM 2010 EFQM Assessment Guide 2010 Page 23 of 49

Key deliverables & Expected outcome