IMS: The Excellence Model Integrated Management Systems Series The Integrated Management Systems (IMS) series of books provides practical guidance and advice on integrating the systems operating within an organization The IMS series provides a framework into which additional management systems can be incorporated Each volume is written by an acknowledged expert in the field The series editor is David Smith of IMS Risk Solutions Ltd, who has been involved in writing management system standards since the early 1990s and is himself the author of a number of BSI books on the subject IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: IMS: The Framework Implementing and Operating Customer Satisfaction Creating a Manual Information Security Managing Food Safety Risk Management for Good Governance The Excellence Model Audit and Review Human Resources I n tegrated M an agem en t System s Seri es IMS: The Excellence Model John M Kelly IMS: The Excellence Model First published 2004 © John M Kelly, 2004 ISBN 580 42282 BSI reference: BIP 2010 The right of John M Kelly to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright subsists in all BSI publications Except as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 no extract may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise – without prior written permission from BSI If permission is granted, the terms may include royalty payments or a licensing agreement Details and advice can be obtained from the Copyright Manager, British Standards Institution, 389 Chiswick High Road, London W4 4AL Great care has been taken to ensure accuracy in the compilation and preparation of this publication However, since it is intended as a guide and not a definitive statement, the authors and BSI cannot in any circumstances accept responsibility for the results of any action taken on the basis of the information contained in the publication nor for any errors or omissions This does not affect your statutory rights Typeset by Monolith – www.monolith.uk.com Printed by PIMS Digital Contents Introduction The business case Focus on the customer The continual improvement approach Examining the costs of quality 11 13 15 Standards – A process benchmark 26 European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) British Quality Foundation (BQF) The Excellence Model The range of standards and their applicability 26 The need for continual improvement – ‘Beyond the badge’ 33 What is quality? Quality management Some basic principles of Total Quality Management (TQM) The learning organization 33 34 37 38 Challenging assumptions – How well the processes work? 40 Process measurement 50 Processes Creating a process culture Summary Measurement Is the organization making progress? Critical Success Factors (CSFs) v 40 42 48 50 51 52 IMS: The Excellence Model The need for process analysis 54 Models for assessing an organization 62 The Excellence Model 69 10 Conducting an assessment 75 11 Performance of the organization 79 12 Comparisons with the best – Benchmarking 97 What is process analysis? The Excellence Model The Malcolm Baldrige Award The Balanced Scorecard The scoring process Self-assessment Award simulation Third-party assessment Award assessments SMART objectives Performance measures Linkages to an IMS Link for system integration Improvement in the organization and benchmarking Types of benchmarking A brief history of benchmarking Identifying best practice Barriers to progress in benchmarking Getting started 13 Summary Appendix Common elements of quality, environmental, OH&S systems and the Excellence Model References vi 54 62 66 67 70 75 75 77 77 80 80 90 95 97 99 101 102 103 104 110 111 113 Acknowledgements This book was written with help and encouragement from many individuals The author would particularly like to thank Chris Millidge, David Smith and Rob Politowski for their help in editing and correlating the many inputs Their help and encouragement has been much appreciated He would also like to express grateful thanks to Richard Parker of British Quality Foundation for reviewing the text and giving permission to include material The author is also extremely grateful to his colleagues at BSI, in particular Jonathan Silver and Helen Stokes, for their help and constructive support Last, but not least, thanks to my wife, without whose patience and support this book would not have been possible Further information about the Excellence Model can be obtained from: British Quality Foundation 32-34 Great Peter Street London SW1P 2QX Tel 0207 654 5000 Fax 0207 654 5001 Website: www.quality-foundation.co.uk vii I n trod u cti on Organizations today are under a great deal of pressure to improve performance and achieve competitive advantage, as indeed are the public and voluntary sectors Any initiatives that can assist management to achieve improved results should be welcomed in today’s competitive world Assessment against the EFQM Excellence Model enables progress to be monitored and provides the opportunity to benchmark against the best in Europe The British Quality Foundation (BQF) is the custodian of the model in the UK The Excellence Model is expressed as a series of nine criteria that can be applied to any organization It has grown out of the original concept of ‘total quality’, a term that has been much derided in the last few years The phrase ‘total quality’ has become somewhat devalued and its image is not what it should be The take-up of the model has increased in recent times, not only amongst large blue-chip organizations but also in medium-sized organizations Interest has also grown in the public sector where it has been used to underpin the requirements of ‘best value’ and as a demonstration of good husbandry to external parties, including ratepayers Many organizations see the Excellence Model as a tool that enables them to move beyond compliance to standards Indeed, it provides a template whereby they can develop their own ‘management model’: targets and standards of operation that are appropriate to their own business and sector Meeting standards can be viewed as a foundation, which must stay in place, but the Excellence Model provides a holistic, coherent approach to both compliance and improvement The two approaches are complementary, since both require a systematic approach to process management Standards such as ISO 9001:2000 provide the pass/fail baseline, whereas the model encourages exemplary levels of continual improvement and the stimulus to apply quality principles in a more comprehensive way IMS: The Excellence Model The model criteria represent a spectrum of challenges and, unlike some standards, there is no compliance point where success or failure is defined However, an effective implementation of a standard will contribute a valuable underpinning to the various aspects that are addressed by the Excellence Model criteria, especially in the process area In striving for excellence, organizations seek to be the best at everything they and to improve continually The key to success is to understand all the interfaces of the customer/supplier chain, i.e all the inputs into the processes, the processes themselves and the end result, at every level of the organization and across every activity Customer and people satisfaction are integral to the achievement of excellence, and are increasingly seen as a successful longer-term strategy, which will lead to better long-term financial results and competitive advantage A key aspect of the Excellence Model is the balance of results, since excellent results must be sustainable This will not be achieved by ignoring key issues such as staff satisfaction or the environmental impact of an organization’s approach Short-term profits or efficiency gains will be quickly wiped out if they are achieved at the cost of frustrated staff or longer-term penalties from regulatory bodies The model gives the most weight to customer satisfaction, and again short-term financial gain will be lost if customers don’t return European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) In 1988, 14 of the leading Western European organizations formed the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM) Their primary concern was enhancing the position of Western European organizations in the world market by stimulating and assisting the development of quality improvement activities, and by the acceleration of the acceptance of quality as a strategy for global competitive advantage It is this organization, together with the support of the European Organization for Quality and the European Commission, which sponsors the European Quality Award The EFQM has two main aims: to accelerate the acceptance of quality as a strategy for global competitive advantage; to stimulate and assist in the development of quality improvement activities IMS: The Excellence Model group, other sites or perhaps even other departments The advantage of this type of benchmarking is that it is typically quite easy to arrange, and the information will usually be shared freely There can, however, be disadvantages Firstly, even with an internal comparison situation, negative competitive issues between different sites may still be present Secondly, it must be remembered that whilst internal benchmarking may yield excellent improvements, the comparison has not been made against world best practice Competitor benchmarking Competitor benchmarking is perhaps the most difficult to undertake Obviously, any information gained will be extremely relevant but due to confidentiality it may be virtually impossible to obtain a comprehensive picture of how the competitor operates Whilst an examination of available metrics will provide some information, it may be impossible to discover how these results are achieved, and this can lead to the wrong changes being introduced However, many of the larger organizations regularly exchange information on specific topics, in order to keep pace with best practice Functional benchmarking Functional benchmarking consists of making comparisons with other, noncompetitive organizations, which conduct similar functional activities, e.g invoicing, recruitment, procurement The advantages of functional benchmarking are that confidentiality is not usually a problem and new approaches, which are as yet not employed in your type of industry, can be modified There may, however, be difficulties in adopting these practices into the organization Generic benchmarking This aims to compare complete business processes across different functions in dissimilar industries These can create the opportunities for unprecedented breakthroughs, but again there will be the necessity to adopt and adapt for integration into the new situation 100 Comparisons with the best – Benchmarking A brief history of benchmarking The modern history of the process of benchmarking can be traced to the early 1950s Around this time, the Japanese were concerned with the rebuilding of their industries, and, as a part of these efforts, visited many organizations in the West By this means they utilized the best business practices they could find Having implemented them, the Japanese then sought to improve them further, an operation which has resulted in their current international reputation today True benchmarking is a structured approach to being the best It is a team activity with a clearly laid-out objective and brief The process to be benchmarked will have been pinpointed, and establishing current performance will be one of the team’s early activities Careful research will be needed to establish the best practice organizations long before any visits are contemplated Detailed planning of the implementation process will be needed if improvements are to be achieved and sustained Like most significant quality improvement activities, management commitment and involvement are essential if benchmarking is to be successful The aim is to establish benchmarking as an ongoing management process, fully integrated into the business Seeking to establish best practice then becomes the natural way of doing things The route map for successful benchmarking is as follows: Planning Analysis Acceptance Action Plan the benchmark Focus on what to benchmark Situation today analysis Comparator data analysis Determine the quality difference Prepare case for improvement Plan implementation Manage the quality gap What should be benchmarked? Selecting what is to be benchmarked is crucial If the aspect chosen is not perceived as important, it is unlikely to secure senior management commitment 101 IMS: The Excellence Model If the benchmarking programme is to have a positive impact on performance it must concentrate on areas, which are critical to the success of the organization In selecting benchmarks, we must take account of market conditions and the strategy of the organization Answering the question: ‘What we need to be good at?’ may indicate the aspects which could usefully be benchmarked We can benchmark any activity that can be measured To identify exactly where effort should be focused, it is helpful to pose two questions: What would make the most significant improvement to the relationship with customers? What would make the most significant improvements to the financial results? Benchmarks that are crucial for customer satisfaction may include: • • • • • consistency of product; correct invoicing; on-time delivery; frequency of delivery; speed of response Discovering which issues are most important for the customer, and their current perception of performance, is an important activity and is a requirement of ISO 9001, 8.2.1 Examples of aspects, which could be benchmarked because they have a direct impact on financial results, could be: • • • • • waste and rejects; inventory (stock) levels; work in progress; cost of sales; sales/employee I d en ti fyi n g best practi ce One of the most difficult parts of a benchmarking exercise is identifying and then implementing best practices Identifying best practice, adapting it 102 Comparisons with the best – Benchmarking to suit our organization and then implementing it in an appropriate way, is what makes benchmarking work Information collection, no matter how much is accomplished, will not improve the performance of the organization It is only taking appropriate action that will achieve results It is not unusual for benchmarking approaches to spend 60 per cent on implementation and 40 per cent on research It is often the case that organizations become resistant to change due to the realization that they are not as good as they perceived they were However, the whole purpose of benchmarking is to stimulate the desire for continual improvement in the aspects that are crucial to the organization In order to achieve this, is essential that the organization: • • • • sets new standards for expected performance; ensures that a person with the appropriate authority is responsible for devising an action plan to reach the new standards; provides the necessary resources for additional research into best practice; monitors progress so that the plan is achieved The organization must continue to benchmark in order to ensure that it can react to improvements in other, possibly competitor, organizations Simultaneously, it must constantly challenge its own best practice to examine how it might be improved upon through internal ideas generated by employees Barriers to progress in benchmarking Common mistakes Confusion with competitive analysis Competitive analysis (CA) is a comparison of ourselves to competitors in our industry, largely in terms of market share, financial measures, competitive strategies, research and development and new product development Whilst useful for planning broad strategy, CA does not go to the level required for process improvement CA is most often done by staff, whereas benchmarking should be conducted by line personnel (process owners), since they are the people who must make any required changes Without the involvement of process owners, little organizational change happens 103 IMS: The Excellence Model Looking at numbers only Benchmarking is often thought of only in terms of numbers, i.e comparisons in terms of time, cost, and quality While such numerical comparisons are useful in calibrating the size of the gap, it is much more important to discover how they got those numbers, so we need to look at the processes behind the results Application to manufacturing only Benchmarking is extremely useful for manufacturing improvement, but should not stop there We should consider every single process (we have thousands) in our organization as a candidate for benchmarking: sales, maintenance, billing, customer service, purchasing and recognition systems In the same vein, benchmarking applies equally to education, health, defence, and government Benchmarking is copying Benchmarking does involve observing and learning about the best practices of others If we copy exactly their practices, that rarely works Things are seldom exactly the same between organizations, i.e in structure, resources, tradition and culture, so we must adapt their methods to fit ours And even if they were the same, we won’t get ahead if we just copied By the time we reach their level, they will have improved We will be forever trying to ‘catch up’ We want competitive superiority, not competitive parity To succeed, we must exceed, and to accomplish that, we must set higher goals, and aim ahead of the organization against which we have benchmarked Table 12.2 summarizes certain problems with benchmarking Getting started Building on the integrated management system – Some common pitfalls This book, and others in the IMS series have outlined the benefits of an Integrated Management System and the steps towards creating a unified response to continual improvement, including use of the Excellence Model 104 Comparisons with the best – Benchmarking Table 12.2 Possible problems with benchmarking Problem Likely causes Solution Benchmarking the wrong measure Inadequate knowledge of own organization and operations Further research to find significant measure Benchmarking the wrong organization Inadequate desk research More detailed initial research Benchmarking not leading to action Senior management not involved Ensure that management is seen to be in support Failure to sell idea to senior management Lack of information, poor presentation Tie Best Practice Benchmarking (BPB) firmly to the existing business plan; show how other companies have benefited Lack of resources for benchmarking Lack of management support; exclusive ownership by the BPB team Lobby and promote BPB as a company-wide approach Data not meaningful Too much/too little data; data not comparable Tighter focus to measures; test the assumption about your processes that generated the measures Inaccurate/false data Over-reliance on public or competitor sources Double-check sources through personal checks Failure to sell idea to target organizations Scepticism and protective instincts Make clear the benefit of shared information; reassess criteria for selection of partners Over-reliance on superficial similarity with partner Lack of rigorous criteria for assessing partners Redefine search to find closer fits Benchmark partner unwilling to share useful data Benchmark partner too alike Define search by process not industry Benchmark too many measures Unclear priorities Relate BPB to business plan Source: Best Practice Benchmarking DTI, 1995 Having established an Integrated Management System how are we to develop and progress the organization and build on our achievements? How can the ever-changing needs and demands of customers be addressed whilst maintaining a hard-won reputation for quality and service? And what are the dangers and common pitfalls? The crucial aspects that should have been addressed include: • • • • a clear vision and mission statement; top management commitment, involvement and resources; good communication and feedback channels; willingness to change/adaptability; 105 IMS: The Excellence Model • • access to training resources; continual learning and development by both the organization and the individual Perhaps the most important requirement is management commitment Things will not always run smoothly; the markets will change, competitors will emerge from unexpected sources, the international scenario can rapidly change Whilst there may be occasions when priorities need to change and resources have to be reallocated, the ‘constancy of purpose’, referred to by Deming, is paramount The adequacy and effectiveness of the procedures and defined processes must be closely measured and monitored Employees, at all levels, must be encouraged to scrutinize processes, procedures and instructions relating to their own activities, and provide feedback Only in this way will errors be identified and corrected, and suggested improvements incorporated An organization which aspires to be the best is one in which everyone is involved in the search for continual improvement as a normal, routine part of their daily lives The quality system approach enables a foundation to be laid whereby we understand how processes work today, and ensures that by following an agreed methodology and procedures we are ‘doing things right’ A continual improvement approach also demands that we answer the question: ‘Are we doing the right things?’ An organization should consist of a group of individuals who share a common purpose and a set of common goals However, the behaviour of a group is not the same as that of the individuals who make up that group, added together A group of people who work together regularly and whose performance in part depends on each other’s efforts quickly develops its own attitudes to authority, its own rules of behaviour and working practices It supports its own individual members, up to a point, and its members draw strength from it It can also sometimes force its members into well-defined roles from which the individual can escape only with great difficulty Since people draw both security and status from their groups it is not surprising that change which threatens their position by, for example, breaking up group composition or isolating certain individuals, will be perceived as a personal threat, and may be strongly resisted by the group as well as by the individual concerned It does not matter whether the threat is real or not; it is how it is perceived that matters One view of the leadership of people is that most people really want to work and see an achievement for the time and effort they put into the company (McGregor’s Theory Y) Further, they can motivate and apply themselves harder than any manager could drive them All they need to see is: 106 Comparisons with the best – Benchmarking • • • what is possible; what it could for them; how it could come about So one of the ways in which the leader can improve the performance needed is to tackle these three points ‘What is possible’ has to be identified by the leader at a very early stage in the management of change and the idea of ‘what is possible’ has to be fostered for a long time before it becomes accepted by enough people to inspire them It is clearly the leader’s task to take the idea of ‘what is possible’ and sell that idea vigorously and enthusiastically to everyone ‘What it could for us’ has to be identified in terms of the benefits it would bring, rather than the technical features And these benefits must be stated in terms that are readily and fully understandable to those who will be affected by the proposal There should be something for everybody if it is at all possible If that is not to be the case, then those who will not benefit must be clearly identified, and some means found for dealing with the problems that this would bring ‘How it could happen’ will only be credible when leaders demonstrate that there is a good plan, that is well thought-out, and which anticipates the problems that will arise It helps tremendously in the implementation when the leaders can show that the problem has already been faced, and even more so when they can point to an early success which confirms their judgement Enthusiasm for change Who wants to follow someone who is unenthusiastic and negative in approach? Leaders have to be especially careful to be enthusiastic, positive in approach and receptive to new ideas and change, despite their own doubts and fears The leader must put aside those doubts, but can only this if having the necessary determination to achieve success There are, however, some things which leaders can in addition to adopting the positive attitudes They can look for successful examples of management of change in their own organization and in the group and ensure that everyone knows about them 107 IMS: The Excellence Model Style of leadership and the management of change Because change, to be successful, has to be welcomed by many people in an organization, those people must believe in that change, and must believe that the change is theirs It is very difficult to put into practice if the leaders have a very strong and assertive style, if they not genuinely consult people In any event it is not possible for the leaders to foresee everything, however good their planning or however competent their own staff So the leader has to rely on people using their initiative within the general framework which has been set out and which will lead to a satisfactory conclusion People will only feel free to use their initiative when they are properly supported, when their efforts are genuinely appreciated and when their leaders or managers leave them real scope for using their initiative and talents to the full See success It is easy for managers faced with problems to see just those problems It is just as easy for managers whose performance is measured and analysed to become hypnotized by their control figures It is easy in any organization for the organization to examine and dissect its failures, to prevent a repetition (and in some cases, to find the guilty party) However, while some of this may be necessary in business, it can easily be overdone An hour spent analysing why something good ‘went right’ is worth at least ten hours spent finding out where something ‘went wrong’ The leader must be successorientated, must see, breathe, exude success and inspire people all around him/her by that positive attitude The search for continual improvement is a never-ending journey and along the way lessons will undoubtedly be learned Establishing an Integrated Management System means that as those lessons are learned and as experience is gained, those lessons can be ‘captured’ and allow the organization to move on to further improvements Experience has shown that some of the pitfalls in attempting to introduce an Integrated Management System and continual improvement into an organization are as follows • 108 Failure to obtain the total long-term commitment of all leaders The introduction of an Integrated Management System as a basis for continual improvement will require a great deal of time, effort and financial resources and therefore the degree of commitment required should not be underestimated Comparisons with the best – Benchmarking • • • • • • Inadequate planning will lead to a fragmented approach that will result in confusion and disappointment In formulating the plans, senior management must be prepared to listen carefully to the concerns and issues raised by the people in the organization These are typically the barriers to progress which, if not addressed, will come back to derail the plans at some later date The organization should not look for ‘quick returns’ and an immediate impact on the ‘bottom line’ Whilst some immediate success is possible, it is most likely that real, fundamental changes will take some time Investing in a large amount of training without a clear plan of how that training will benefit the overall drive for continual improvement Training, of itself, will only benefit the organizations at the margins, unless there is a desire and resolve to utilize what has been learned Reluctance to admit that some aspect of the adopted approach is not working, and consequently rethinking and realigning the plans In some instances, these minor setbacks are used to argue the case for totally abandoning the whole approach – a case of ‘throwing the baby out with the bath water’ Chasing the badge or the award in order to add the logo to the letterhead Whilst there are major benefits to be gained from meeting a standard or doing well in an award process, the real benefit should be seen internally through improved business performance, improved processes and greater market share 109 Summary This book has attempted to demonstrate how an Integrated Management System and the Excellence Model can be complementary and assist any organization on its journey of continual improvement It has also emphasized that whilst there are a number of standards, models and tools that may be of benefit to an organization desiring to ‘become the best’, these must be applied in a systematic and well thought-through way Although every organization has strong similarities such as customers, people and processes they will have their own culture, sector, history and so on The overall approach and strategy and the sequence in which it adopts any particular approach must be determined by the organization itself Whilst outside guidance, assistance or mentoring may prove invaluable in providing a fresh pair of eyes to the situation; those within the organization are far better placed to understand the intricacies of the specific situation in which they find themselves The need for continual improvement has never been more acute However, unless we are able to harness the knowledge, experience and enthusiasm of every single person within the organization, then we are likely to be unsuccessful Typically, we have seen a number of initiatives aimed at particular problems, usually focused on a selected number of employees, which have been disparate, unconnected and badly planned without any thought for the confusion which inevitably results An Integrated Management System that incorporates all the business requirements in a unified approach, can be comprehensive yet provide simplicity In addition, it can provide a ‘road map’ for continual improvement Some organizations have, for example, established a common approach to problem solving so that every employee understands how the approach and tools can be used, thus developing teamwork Finally, I am reminded of the old saying: ‘If we always what we’ve always done, we’ll always get what we’ve always got.’ 110 Appen d i x C om m on el em en ts of q u al i ty, envi ron m en tal , OH &S system s an d th e E xcel l en ce M od el E l em en ts M an agem en t system Pol i cy 1 Policy and principles I S0 OH SAS 001 :1 96 8001 :1 99 E xcel l en ce M od el clause clause clause cri teri a 5.1 , 53 4.2 4.2 1a 2a, 2b, 2c, 2d, 2e 5.2, 5.4.2, 7.2.1 , 7.2.2 4.3.1 , 4.3.2 4.3.1 , 4.3.2 5a 5.4.1 5.4.2 5.5.2, 5.5.3 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4.1 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.4.1 5a 2e 3a, 4b, 4c, 4e 3a, 3b 4.4.6 a, 5d Pl an n i n g 2.1 Identification of business risks 2.2 Selection of significant aspects to be addressed 2.3 Objectives and targets 2.4 Identification of resources 2.5 Identification of organizational structures, roles, responsibilities and authorities 2.6 Planning of operational control 2.7 Contingency preparedness for foreseeable events I S0 9001 : 2000 7.1 , 8.3 4.4.7 4.4.7 a, 4e 7.2-7.5 6.2.2 4.4.6 4.4.2,4.4.6 4.4.6 4.4.2, 4.4.6 4.4.4 4.4.4 5c d, 3a, 3c, 3d, 3e 4a I m pl em en tati on an d operati on 3.1 Operation control 3.2 Management of human resources 3.3 Management of other resources 111 IMS: The Excellence Model 3.4 Documentation and its control 3.5 Communication 3.6 Relationship with suppliers and contractors 4.2 4.4.5, 4.5.3 4.4.5, 4.5.3 5a 5.5.3 7.2.3 4.4.3 4.4.5 4.4.3 4.4.5 1c 8.2 4.5.1 8.3 4.5.2 4.5.1 6, 7, 8, 4.5.2 8.2.2 4.5.4 4.5.4 8.5.2 8.5.3 5.4.2, 8.5 4.5.2 4.5.2 4.5.2 4.5.2 5.6 4.6 4.6 Perform an ce assessm en t 4.4 Monitoring and measurement 4.5 Analysing and handling nonconformities 4.6 Management system audit I m provem en t 5.1 Corrective action 5.2 Preventive action 5.3 Continual improvement M an agem en t 6.1 General 6.2 Review input 6.3 Review output 112 5b, 5e References Standards BS 5179-1:1974, Guide to the operation and evaluation of quality assurance systems – Part 1: Final inspection system (withdrawn) BS 5179-2:1974, Guide to the operation and evaluation of quality assurance systems – Part 2: Comprehensive inspection system (withdrawn) BS 5179-3:1974, Guide to the operation and evaluation of quality assurance systems – Part 3: Comprehensive quality control system (withdrawn) BS 5750, Quality systems (Note: most of this series have been superseded by the ISO 9000 series of standards.) BS EN ISO 9000:2000, Quality management systems — Fundamentals and vocabulary BS EN ISO 9001:2000, Quality management systems — Requirements BS EN ISO 9004:2000, Quality management systems — Guidelines for performance improvements BS EN ISO 14001:1996, Environmental management systems – Specification with guidance for use ISO Guide 72:2001, Guidelines for the justification and development of management system standards OHSAS 18001:1999, Occupational health and safety management systems – Specification 113 IMS: The Excellence Model Other publications Best Practice Benchmarking DTI, 1995 Camp, Robert C., Benchmarking Quality Resources, 1989 Crosby, P B., Quality Is Free Signet, 1992 Deming, W E., Out of the Crisis The MIT Press, 2000 Ishikawa, K., Guide to Quality Control Asian Productivity Organization, 1986 Juran, Joseph M and Frank M Gyrna, Quality Planning and Analysis: From Product Development Through Use McGraw-Hill Education, 2000 Juran, Joseph M., Juran on Planning for Quality The Free Press, 1988 Juran, Joseph M., A, Blanton Godfrey, Quality Control Handbook McGraw-Hill Professional; 5th edition 1998 Kaplan, Robert S., Arthur Lowes and David P Norton, Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action Harvard Business School Press, 1996 Our Competitive Future — Building the Knowledge-Driven Economy Government White Paper, 1998 Pedler, Mike, Tom Boydell and John Burgoyne, The Learning Company: A Strategy for Sustainable Development McGraw-Hill, 1996 RSA Enquiry Tomorrow’s Company: The Role of Business in a Changing World 1995 Smith, D., IMS: The Framework BSI, 2001 Smith, D., IMS: Implementing and operating BSI, 2002 Taylor, Frederick W., The Principles of Scientific Management New York: Harper Bros, 1911 Warner, Sir Frederick, Standards and specifications in the engineering industries BSI, 1977 114