|
| |
Do you think you are ready to embark on the
process of change in maintenance?
If you aren't sure, complete this
questionnaire to help you decide if and where the obstructions to completing
your change project successfully might arise.
Either way, PRIME will be able to help you,
either to prepare the ground for introducing change, or to design and implement
the change process itself.
Section
1 –Rate of Return
Process
|
Minimum
|
Score (1
– 5)
|
Maximum
|
|
1.
Extent of Benefit
|
No
Cost/Benefit analysis done, or Cost/Benefit analysis indicates poor return
or long timescale for benefit to accrue
|
|
Cost/Benefit
analysis carried out and indicates significant benefit, with appreciable
amount of front-loading
|
|
2.
Programme budget.
|
Budget
for the change process is high, with considerable padding to cover
unforeseen events. Little incentive for delivering under budget.
|
|
Budget
for the project has been challenged and is not padded. Management plan and
incentives in place for delivering under budget.
|
|
3.
Project Management
|
There
is no project plan before starting project, or plan lacks detail.
|
|
Detailed
project plan is prepared before project starts, with firm timescale, cost
structure and individual responsibilities defined.
|
|
4.
Focus on results.
|
Impact
on business results not assessed. Improvement targets lacking or
imprecise.
|
|
Performance
targets have been fully defined before project starts, with timescales and
milestones.
|
|
|
SCORE
|
|
|
Section
2 – Risk Management Processes
Process
|
Minimum
|
Score (1
– 5)
|
Maximum
|
|
1.Risk
management Process
|
No
risk management process defined. No regularised discussion on risk.
|
|
Risk
management process fully defined, and understood by all members of the
Change Process team. Regular discussion on risks and their mitigation.
|
|
2.
Programme Definition
|
No
definition of the extent of change has been defined.
|
|
The
extent and timing of each element
of the change process, and its effect on people, teams and departments has
been defined in detailed, and communicated to all affected by the changes.
|
|
3.
Process Effectiveness
|
No
processes established for assessing monitoring that the change is being
effected.
|
|
A
formal process for measuring the progress of the changes is in place, with
individual accountability for success.
|
|
4.
Adequacy of Resource
|
Resources
inadequate or not properly assessed. Cynicism & inertia is rife.
|
|
Resources
have been objectively assessed and provided. High quality project
sponsorship in place, with good reception by people affected by the
changes.
|
|
5.
Breadth of Consequences
|
No
consideration has been made of consequences beyond the scope of the
project.
|
|
A
detailed study has been done to assess the consequences beyond the project
brief, and actions put in place to get buy-in from areas of the business
affected by the process.
|
|
6.
Communication Processes
|
No
attempt made to communicate the change project scope, or communication has
been random and confused.
|
|
A
high quality, regular communication programme has been established,
supporting 2-way involvement from business holders and people affected by
the process.
|
|
7.
Coherence.
|
There
is no logical structure for the sequence of changes.
|
|
The
change process has been planned to ensure a logical sequence of changes
with a sensible rationale. There is sufficient time to ensure that
preparatory actions are adequately completed before embarking on
succeeding actions
|
|
|
SCORE
|
|
|
Section
3 – Latent Opportunity Assessment
Process
|
Minimum
|
Score (1
– 5)
|
Maximum
|
|
1.
Programme Scope
|
Change
programme is based on a single thrust. No appraisal of additional scope
opportunity has been assessed.
|
|
A
wide-ranging review of the additional opportunities released by the
proposed project has been conducted, and the project scope has been
extended where the additional opportunities are justified.
|
|
2.
Performance Improvement.
|
There
are no performance measures identified, or the measures defined are not
connected to the defined
drivers for the change process.
|
|
There
are well-defined performance measures in place, with clear understanding
of what they mean and how they are calculated. The measures are clearly
linked to the drivers for the project.
|
|
3.
Benchmarking
|
Benchmarking
has not been carried out, internally or externally.
|
|
Benchmarking
has been done internally and against industry “Best Practice”
comparators.
|
|
4.
Benchmarking Quality
|
Benchmarking
processes are not in place or are informal and inexact, based on
unstructured systems of auditing.
|
|
Benchmarking
is based on established methodologies which are formally applied. Output
data is reviewed to ensure that it is not biased by external factors
|
|
|
SCORE
|
|
|
|
Scoring
Summary
|
Actual
Score
|
Possible
Score
|
Section 1 –
Rate of Return
|
|
20
|
|
Section
2 – Risk Management
|
|
35
|
|
Section
3 – Latent Opportunity
|
|
20
|
Total
Score
|
|
75
|
So, are
you ready for the change process?
15
– 34 Points Take Care!
- You may not yet be ready for change
35 – 55 Points
- Keep a close eye on events to avoid failure
56
– 75 Points - You are in good shape
for change
{Home}
{Return to Top of Page}
| |
|
