Question Two

$(30$ Marks$)$

Critique the high$-$level SQF against the EFQM Excellence Model showing the overlaps and

$$underlaps$"$ and provide advice to the management of Shell Services on how their framework could

be developed and improved. Figure C$2\mathrm{.}2$

STRUCTURE OF THE SQF

At the top level, the SQF is a simple but powerful construct consisting of five key chevrons. Four of

these are enablers $-$ namely Purpose, People, Resources and Process. The fifth is the Results

chevron, which focuses on tracking performance improvement because of implementing the

framework $($Figure C$2\mathrm{.}3).$ Although this may seem a simple construct it has proved tremendously

valuable, even at the top level, to ask a simple question about each of the five chevrons. A

satisfactory answer is somewhat more difficult to provide than a business leader might expect. Each

of the chevrons is broken down into level $2$ and level $3$ components to define key descriptors, for

which tiers of practice, including best practice, can be defined at level $4.$ This is best illustrated in

Figure C$2\mathrm{.}4,$ where the Process chevron is taken down to level four of the framework.

Source: Read the case study below and answer ALL the questions that follow.

Sustainable business improvement in a global corporation$-$ Shell services

Background

Setting up a new global organization is a challenge. To do this by harmonizing existing but different

business operations across the world into a single, global organization adds another level of complexity.

This case study describes how Shell Services enabled such a transformation by developing and putting in

place a set of tools, processes and systems that became known as the Shell Services Quality Framework,

or SQF$.$ To put the organization into context, Shell Services comprised several companies across the globe

employing some $6500$ staff with a turnover more than $$1bn.$ With a clear focus on becoming a customer$-$

centric organization, there was a need to look at the core processes required to sustain improve d

business performance as perceived by customers. Many of these processes were broken. At the same

time, it was recognized that without helping the people in the organization to embrace the values,

behaviours, and competencies necessary to become customer$-$centric, the vision could not be achieved.

Finally, both people and process improvements had to be underpinned by a quality framework that could

be used to define standards, targets, and metrics as well as tracking performance improvements over

time $($Figure C$2\mathrm{.}1).$

With such a diverse and complex organization, no one existing quality model was seen as offering a

suitable basis for harmonization and inclusivity. Although some proprietary models were favoured

locally, there was seen to be benefit in seeking to bring together the best of these into a Shell

specific product. Criteria such as simplicity with completeness, inclusion of best practice, availability

of supporting tools and suitability for self$-$assessment were chosen and several well$-$known quality

improvement approaches were researched to arrive at the SQF $($Figure C$2\mathrm{.}2).$ Each model

contributed attributes and strengths, but no single model offered the power, simplicity, and

completeness of the SQF$.$