A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Organizational Self-Assessment at U. S. Air Force Wings Using Baldrige-based Nonprescriptive Criteria

Doctoral Dissertation (1997) Walden University

Abstract

This dissertation was a Qualitative and Quantitative Study of Organization Self-Assessment Using Non-prescriptive Criteria. This study examines the process of understanding, evaluating, and improving organizational performance through self-assessment using Baldrige-based, non-prescriptive criteria at the 15th Air Base Wing, Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii. Self-assessment activities and reports were treated as predictor variables of the subsequent activities, reports, and outcomes, which were treated as criterion variables. To address the effects of self-assessment activities on subsequent activities, reports, and actual improvements, this study focused on six relationships: (a) the organization’s readiness (criteria and strategy alignment, process knowledge, and motivation) and the self-assessment process and reports; (b) assessment planning and preparation and data collection, analysis, and report writing; (c) data collection, analysis, and report writing and the quality of the assessment report; (d) the quality of the assessment report and the evaluation process; (e) the evaluation process and the quality of the feedback report; and (f) the overall assessment process and reports and their effect on organizational improvement. These relationships were examined using a combined quasi-deductive qualitative and quantitative (mixed model) methodology. Qualitative analysis consisted of data reduction, display, and conclusion drawing based data from documents, in-depth interviews, and survey comments. Quantitative analysis (descriptive statistics and correlation analysis) of assessment activities performance and importance was based on survey results using a 5-point Likert scale. According to Spearman correlation tests, self-assessment activities were significantly related to the quality of the assessment report at the .000, .001, or .002 level. The level of senior leader motivation significantly affected the selection and support of the assessors and, in turn, the quality of the report. The quality of the report affected the level of understanding of the organization’s management systems which, in turn, affected the evaluation process and the quality of the feedback. Self-assessment is a self-fulfilling prophecy, what management expects they will get. The study found that self-assessment using nonprescriptive criteria is a knowledge production or learning cycle consisting of four core activities: (a) criteria questions addressing the organization’s management systems, (b) understanding the systems, (c) evaluating the systems, and (d) reflecting on the understanding and evaluation, which enables the organization to plan the appropriate changes to improve performance.

Downloads

1. Dissertation (PDF) Download 2.7mb
   

2. Colloquium Presentation Slides (PDF) Download 1.4mb
   

Cited In

1. 1.Latham, J and Vinyard J. (2005 - 2008) Baldrige User’s Guide: Organization Diagnosis, Design, and Transformation (all 3 editions). An influential part of the chapter on organization transformation - The Journey, pp. 417 - 439. 
   

2. 2.Brewer, D. (2004). Development of a Systematic Approach to Implement the Baldrige Education Criteria for Performance Excellence in Higher Education and Evaluate Management Effectiveness Using the Results to Improve Education Procedures, Nova Southeastern University cites several of the findings from my 1997 Dissertation.
   

3. 3.Ford, M. W. and J. R. Evans (2002). Selecting and Using Models for Organizational Self-Assessment. Decision Sciences Institute 2002 Annual Meeting Proceedings.
   

4. 4.Ford, M. and Evans, J. (2001). Baldrige Assessment and Organizational Learning: The Needs for Change Management, Quality Management Journal, Vol 8, Issue 3. p. 22 cite the findings from this dissertation.
   

5. 5.Ford, M. W. (2000). A Model of Change Process and its use in Self-Assessment. Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Quantitative Analysis & Operations Management. Cincinnati, University of Cincinnati: p. 352. Cites this dissertation 4 times throughout the dissertation.