Baldrige Business and Public Sector and Other Nonprofit Scoring Guidelines - ACTIONABLE Versions
(Note: 2008 BUSINESS, PUBLIC SECTOR and OTHER NONPROFIT versions are shown below with live hyperlinks to the definitions for key terms indicated by words in ALL CAPS.)
2008 Baldrige PROCESS Scoring Guidelines - Business, Public Sector and other Nonprofit
|
SCORE |
2008 Baldrige
PROCESS
Scoring Guidelines
(BUSINESS
and
NONPROFIT
Actionable Version) |
|
0% or 5% |
§
No
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH to Item requirements is evident; information is
ANECDOTAL.
(A)
§
Little or no
DEPLOYMENT of any
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH is evident.
(D)
§
An improvement orientation is not evident; improvement is achieved
through reacting to problems.
(L)
§
No organizational
ALIGNMENT is evident; individual areas or work units
operate independently.
(I) |
|
10%, 15%,
20%, or 25% |
§
The beginning of a
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH to the
BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item is evident.
(A)
§
The
APPROACH is in the early stages of
DEPLOYMENT in most areas or work units, inhibiting
progress in achieving the
BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item.
(D)
§
Early stages of a transition from reacting to problems to a general
improvement orientation are evident.
(L)
§
The
APPROACH is
ALIGNED with other areas or work units largely through
joint problem solving.
(I) |
|
30%, 35%,
40%, or 45% |
§
An
EFFECTIVE,
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH, responsive to the
BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident.
(A)
§
The
APPROACH is
DEPLOYED, although some areas or work units are in early
stages of
DEPLOYMENT.
(D)
§
The beginning of a
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH
to evaluation and improvement of
KEY
PROCESSES
is evident.
(L)
§
The
APPROACH is in the early stages of
ALIGNMENT with your basic organizational needs identified
in response to the
Organizational Profile and other Process Items.
(I) |
|
50%, 55%,
60%, or 65% |
§
An
EFFECTIVE,
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH, responsive to the
OVERALL REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident.
(A)
§
The
APPROACH is well
DEPLOYED, although
DEPLOYMENT may vary in some areas or work units.
(D)
§
A fact-based,
SYSTEMATIC
evaluation and improvement
PROCESS
and some organizational
LEARNING,
including
innovation, are in place for improving the efficiency and
EFFECTIVENESS of
KEY
PROCESSES.
(L)
§
The
APPROACH is
ALIGNED with your organizational needs identified in
response to the
Organizational Profile and other Process Items(I) |
|
70%, 75%,
80%, or 85% |
§
An
EFFECTIVE,
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH, responsive to the
MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident.
(A)
§
The
APPROACH is well
DEPLOYED, with no significant gaps.
(D)
§
Fact-based,
SYSTEMATIC
evaluation and improvement and organizational
LEARNING,
including
innovation, are
KEY
management tools; there is clear evidence of refinement
as a result of organizational-level
ANALYSIS
and sharing.
(L)
§
The
APPROACH is
INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in
response to the
Organizational Profile and other Process Items.
(I) |
|
90%, 95%, or 100% |
§
An
EFFECTIVE,
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH, fully responsive to the
MULTIPLE REQUIREMENTS of the Item, is evident.
(A)
§
The
APPROACH is fully
DEPLOYED without significant weaknesses or gaps in any
areas or work units.
(D)
§
Fact-based,
SYSTEMATIC
evaluation and improvement and organizational
LEARNING
through
innovation are
KEY
organization-wide tools; refinement and
INNOVATION,
backed by
ANALYSIS
and sharing, are evident throughout the organization.
(L)
§
The
APPROACH is well
INTEGRATED with your organizational needs identified in
response to the
Organizational Profile and other Process Items.
(I) |
Note: 2008 changes in the Process Scoring Guidelines (additions and deletions) are shown below on this page in a special marked-up version.
2008 Baldrige RESULTS Scoring Guidelines - Business, Public Sector and other Nonprofit
|
SCORE |
2008 Baldrige
RESULTS
Scoring Guidelines
(BUSINESS
and
NONPROFIT
Actionable Version) |
|
0% or 5% |
§
There are no organizational
PERFORMANCE
RESULTS
or poor
RESULTS
in areas reported. (Le)
§
TREND
data either are not reported or show mainly adverse
TRENDS.
(T)
§
Comparative information is not reported. (C)
§
RESULTS
are not reported for any areas of importance to
the
accomplishment of your organization’s
MISSION.
(I) |
|
10%, 15%,
20%, or 25% |
§
A few organizational
PERFORMANCE
RESULTS
are reported
§
Some
TREND
data are reported,
with some
adverse
TRENDS
evident.
(T)
§
Little or no comparative information is reported.
(C)
§
RESULTS
are reported for a few areas of importance to
the
accomplishment of your organization’s
MISSION.
(I) |
|
30%, 35%,
40%, or 45% |
§
Good
PERFORMANCE
LEVELS
are reported
for some
areas addressed in the Item requirements. (Le)
§
Some
TREND
data
are
reported and a majority of the trends presented are beneficial.
(T)
§
Early stages of obtaining comparative information are evident.
(C)
§
RESULTS
are reported for many areas of importance to
the
accomplishment of your organization’s
MISSION.
(I) |
|
50%, 55%,
60%, or 65% |
§
Good
organizational
PERFORMANCE
LEVELS
are reported for most areas addressed in Item requirements.
(Le)
§
Beneficial
TRENDS
are
reported
in areas of importance to
the
accomplishment of your organization’s
MISSION.
(T)
§
Some
current
PERFORMANCE
LEVELS
have been
evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or
BENCHMARKS
and
show areas of good
relative
PERFORMANCE.
(C)
§
Organizational
PERFORMANCE
RESULTS
are reported for
most
KEY
CUSTOMER,
market, and
PROCESS
requirements. (I) |
|
70%, 75%,
80%, or 85% |
§
Good to excellent
PERFORMANCE
LEVELS
are reported
for
§
Beneficial
TRENDS
have been sustained over time
in most
areas of importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s
MISSION. (T)
§
Many to most
TRENDS
and
current
PERFORMANCE
LEVELS
have been
evaluated against relevant comparisons and/or
BENCHMARKS
and
show areas of leadership and very good relative
PERFORMANCE.
(C)
§
Organizational
PERFORMANCE
RESULTS
are reported for
most
KEY
CUSTOMER,
market,
PROCESS,
and
ACTION PLAN
requirements,
and they
include some projections of your future performance.
(I) |
|
90%, 95%, or 100% |
§
Excellent
organizational
PERFORMANCE
LEVELS
are
reported
for
most areas of importance to the Item requirements.
(Le)
§
Beneficial
TRENDS
have been sustained over time in
all
areas
of
importance to the accomplishment of your organization’s MISSION.
(T)
§
Evidence of industry and
BENCHMARK
leadership is demonstrated in many areas. (C)
§
Organizational
PERFORMANCE
RESULTS
fully address
KEY
CUSTOMER,
market,
PROCESS,
and
ACTION PLAN
requirements,
and they
include PROJECTIONS of your future PERFORMANCE.
(I) |
Note: Click on a CAPITALIZED word or letter to go to its definition in the
ACTIONABLE
version of the Baldrige Business and Nonprofit Scoring Guidelines. Although the
words are the same, it should not be viewed as endorsed by NIST
________________________________________________
VERSIONS WITH 2008 CHANGES
Note: The Scoring Guidelines below show the new changes for 2008
2008 Baldrige PROCESS Scoring Guidelines - Business, Public Sector and other Nonprofit
|
SCORE |
2008 Baldrige
PROCESS
Scoring Guidelines
(BUSINESS
and
NONPROFIT
Actionable Version) |
|
0% or 5% |
§
No
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH to Item requirements is evident; information is
ANECDOTAL.
(A)
§
Little or no
DEPLOYMENT of any
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH is evident.
(D)
§
An improvement orientation is not evident; improvement is achieved
through reacting to problems.
(L)
§
No organizational
ALIGNMENT is evident; individual areas or work units
operate independently.
(I) |
|
10%, 15%,
20%, or 25% |
§
The beginning of a
SYSTEMATIC
APPROACH to the
BASIC REQUIREMENTS of the Item is evident.
(A)
|