In particular, the present case study describes the PEF application to four small ACI units belonging to the same Italian region (Abruzzo): the ACI Directorate of L’Aquila and the ACI units of three other cities of the region: Pescara, Teramo and Chieti.
There are some common specific characteristics of the four units which are worth mentioning:
– small size (from 10 to 30 employees)
– legal independence
– same mission (coming from ACI Federation)
– common ecosystem and similar relationships with stakeholders
– limited knowledge of the CAF and no previous experience in its application.
For the four units, a new approach was defined: a synergic application in each phase of PEF process to guarantee efficiency and effectiveness. A combination of individual and common activities shall guarantee an effective and concrete engagement of each single unit in the PEF process. The digital tool “F@cile CAF platform”, developed by the Italian CAF Resource Centre was used to facilitate and support the entire process.
After a consultation with the Italian CAF Resource Centre, the decision was to explore and implement a new, common approach for the PEF application of the four units: a combination of common (joint) and individual activities.
For a clearer overview, here is a short list of activities as defined for the implementation process, with indication if they are joint (common) or individual activities:
Table 2, joint and individiual activities.
The Application phases of the project
The start: decision and preparation phase
The established Guidance Committee can be seen as a key success factor for the overall effective coordination and implementation of the activities. This committee was appointed to define and manage the whole process, with the direct participation of managers and representatives of the four local offices, and with the support of a representative of ACI Direction Presidency and General Secretary Central and an expert of the Italian CAF Resource Centre.
In particular, the work of the Guidance Committee reflected a common management of the PEF process by the four organisations, as follows:
● Definition and implementation of the entire plan
● Training activities (using the digital platform made available by the Italian CAF Resource Centre and with the support of experts of ACI Central and Italian CAF Resource Centre
● Definition of common guidelines for the entire process
● Definition of internal and external communication (to people, partners, institutions, customers) using the same tools and contents
● Support to the continuous exchange of knowledge and experiences between different units
The self-assessment phase
The self-assessment is a typical individual activity for each single organisation, but in the case of similar organisations it could be helpful to define a common approach and common support tools. In this case, the activities have been:
● Common definition of guidelines, use of digital platform made available by Italian CAF Resource Centre
● Individual self-assessment by each unit
● Individual analysis of weakness areas and possible ideas for improvement
● Individual improvement priority assessment (using a relevance/value matrix)
● Meetings among delegates from each Unit during the activities, aiming at discussing, harmonising, aligning the process, and reviewing the results.
Improvement plan definition phase
Starting from individual prioritisation assessment (relevance/value matrices), an innovative approach has been used to find a possible common improvement project (to be managed together by the units). In addition, further projects have been defined, to be individually managed by single units.
This is how it can be described in a more detailed manner:
● A common Improvement Committee defined the guidelines for the selection of improvement projects and definition of improvement plan, in line with the ACI Federation mission
● Using a structured approach (see Scheme – Selection of common projects for the units), a common project has been defined on shared priority areas. The implementation of the project has been managed with the participation of delegates from each unit
● In addition, individual projects for each unit have been defined and implemented on specific individual priorities
Improvement projects implementation
A project team with representatives of each office managed the common project up to the conclusion and the review of final results.
In addition, four individual projects have been managed by project teams inside each office.
The Improvement Committee had the task to monitor and evaluate the implementation of the whole CAF improvement plan.
CAF External Feedback (PEF) assessment
Two experienced CAF External Feedback Actors were appointed to assess the four units according to the PEF Guidelines. The PEF was conducted in a combination of on-site visits (in L’Aquila) and online meetings.
According to the different phases of the activities, the assessment has been realised partly with single organisations and partly in common meetings.
In particular:
● Common meetings with the four units to assess the planning and coordination of the whole process (PEF pillar 1), the definition of the improvement plan and the management of the common project (PEF Pillar 2)
● Individual meetings with single units to assess the self-assessment phases (PEF pillar 1), the individual projects (PEF pillar 2), and TQM principles (PEF pillar 3)
Common and individual phases in the assessment
At the end, the External Feedback Actors produced four individual feedback reports for each unit, stating high performance and recommending the ECU label. Consequently the National Organiser issued four Effective CAF User certificates.
Please have a look at table 3 for a clearer overview between joint and individual phases in the PEF application:
Table 3, joint and individiual phases PEF application.
