Hoshin Planning (Kanri)
The Application of a TQM/QI
Model to a College or
University Environment
A Brief Illustration
Origins

Although the concept Hoshin Planning is not
familiar to many educators, the process,
developed by the Japanese corporate world in
support of quality improvement initiatives, is
well-understood and often utilized



By Edwards Deming Prize candidates in Japan
By Malcolm Baldrige Award candidates in the United
States and
By other for-profit and not-for-profit organizations
seeking to maximize organizational assessment,
planning, improvement, and effectiveness
Hoshin Planning Works
(http://www.tqu.com/hoshin.html)

According to Total Quality Engineering, a forprofit consulting firm specializing in
organizational effectiveness,


Most Malcolm Baldrige Award winners
incorporate the Hoshin concept into their
planning initiatives, and
Many progressive US companies (e.g., HewlettPackard and Xerox) make Hoshin Planning the
centerpiece of their strategic planning process.
The Term Hoshin Planning (Kanri)

The word Hoshin results from the combination
of two Japanese words:



Ho
Shin
Hoshin
means course or direction
means needle
means direction needle (or compass)
The Term Hoshin Planning
(Kanri)

The word Kanri results from the
combination of two Japanese words



Kan
Ri
means control
means reason or logic
The process of Hoshin Kanri can be
understood as an effort to manage or
control change in order to facilitate
organizational effectiveness
Deming Transformed

In his efforts to improve Japanese
production, Edwards Deming introduced a
QI technique that incorporates four
continuous processes known as PDCA
 Plan
 Do
 Check
 Act
Deming Transformed (cont.)


The term Hoshin Planning (Kanri) describes the
application of the PDCA production cycle to the
management process.
As the Institutional Effectiveness Model
published in the SACS/COC Institutional
Effectiveness Manual (1992, page 6) illustrates,
the PDCA process and the SACS/COC
institutional effectiveness model are compatible
processes.
Components of a Planning and
Evaluation Process
Within the Corporate Environment,
Hoshin Planning Supports
 Routine
Operations, e.g.
 Correcting
production defaults
 Achieving on-time delivery
 Inventory control
 Production efficiency
 Strategic
Planning
Within the College Environment,
Hoshin Planning can





Inform the strategic planning process
Inform planning within the separate colleges,
schools, divisions, and units of the institution
Support programmatic improvements
Facilitate the winnowing of the institution’s
Quality Enhancement Plan
Significantly, one instrument can do all of these
things simultaneously
HOSHIN PLANNING
[OTHER BENEFITS]




Gives all, or nearly all, interested parties a voice
in the planning process
Allows planners to identify and address political
differences
Functions, de facto, as an assessment of existing
plans
By-product: Generates a number of good ideas
that can be implemented routinely though the
separate offices and units of the institution
FORMAL AND INFORMAL
ASSESSMENT


Formal assessment is essential, but often
some of the most significant assessment
occurs as groups (trustees, administrators,
faculty, staff, students) work, socialize,
and play
Hoshin Planning gives voice to both formal
and informal assessment in the creation of
a comprehensive instrument that defines
and ranks possible institutional or
programmatic improvements
HOSHIN PLANNING COMMENCES WITH A
NARROW/SINGULAR FOCUS





If you could do just one thing to improve student
learning at College X, what would your do?
If you could do just one thing to improve the
learning environment at College X, what would
your do?
If you could do just one thing to create brand
recognition for College X, what would your do?
If you could do just one thing to improve campus
civility at College X, what would you do?
If you could do just one thing to solve problem Z,
at College X, what would you do?
STEPS IN HOSHIN PLANNING
[CORPORATE MODEL]




DEFINE THE FOCUS—WHAT DO YOU WANT TO
IMPROVE?
ENVISION POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS BY
BRAINSTORMING
RANK THE SUGGESTIONS
IMPLEMENT THE TOP SUGGESTIONS





1–3
1–5
1 – 10
ASSESS THE RESULTS
REPEAT THE PROCESS UNTIL QUALITY IS
MAXIMIZED
HOSHIN PLANNING
[college or university environment]

The corporate model could work in the
educational environment if the purpose of the
Hoshin Planning exercise were narrowly defined,
e.g.



If you could do just one thing to improve campus
civility, what would you do?
If you could do just one thing to improve the
freshman-year experience, what would you do?
If you could do just one thing to improve the senioryear experience, what would you do?
Hoshin Planning

At Louisburg College, however, we had a
larger goal


To inform the planning process leading to the
development of a triennial edition of the
Louisburg College Strategic Plan—a plan with
multiple strategic directions
Therefore, the question at LC was intentionally
broad
THE QUESTION FOR LC
IF YOU COULD DO JUST ONE
THING TO IMPROVE STUDENT
LEARNING AND/OR THE
LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AT
LOUISBURG COLLEGE,
WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
THINKING STRATEGICALLY
Although the question had a
narrow focus, it was intentionally
designed to invite suggested
improvements related to each of
the separate strategic directions
of Louisburg College.
The Strategic Directions of LC
TO CONTINUOUSLY
 improve financial strength
 improve campus facilities
 manage enrollment
 create a purposeful academic community
 develop a regionally-recognized Learning Disability program
 maintain a civil and supportive learning environment
 improve information technologies
 improve communications, both internal and external
 strengthen the relationship with the congregations of The
United Methodist Church
HOSHIN PLANNING
[an instrument of assessment]

Although the purpose of Hoshin Planning
was to envision the 2007 – 2009 edition of
the LC Strategic Plan, the process
functioned, de facto, as an assessment of
the existing strategic directions of
Louisburg College.
HOSHIN PLANNING
[as an instrument of assessing the strategic
directions of Louisburg College]
EXAMPLE: Although the academic
purposes of Louisburg College were
assumed, the existing strategic directions
of Louisburg College did not include a
strategic direction that focused
intentionally on the academic purposes of
Louisburg College.
HOSHIN PLANNING
[an instrument of assessment]


Yet, 40 (30.76%) of the 130 suggestions
resulting from the 2005 - 2006 Hoshin Planning
process focused, directly or indirectly, on the
creation of a purposeful academic community,
with the result that
the 2007 – 2009 edition of the LC Strategic Plan
includes a new strategic direction—to
continuously create a purposeful academic
community [as defined in Campus Life: In Search
of Community—a report of the Carnegie
Foundation for The Advancement of Teaching]
HOSHIN PLANNING
[as assessment of the existing strategic plan]


Nine (7%) of the 130 suggestions
resulting from the 2005 – 2006 Hoshin
Planning process focused upon the
creation of a civil learning environment,
with the result that
In the 2007 – 2009 edition of the LC
Strategic Plan, the strategic direction that
previously read to continuously create a
supportive learning environment has been
revised to read to continuously create a
civil and supportive learning environment
HOSHIN PLANNING
[as assessment of existing strategic
directions]


During the 90s, Louisburg College developed one
of the first comprehensive programs in the
Southeast for high potential students with
diagnosed learning disabilities/differences
The 2005-2006 Hoshin Planning Process and
subsequent discussions indicated that


Faculty and trustees had different expectations for this
program
The Learning Partners Program would benefit from a
more intentional focus
LEARNING PARTNERS
[and The Academy]

As a result of subsequent assessment and
planning:
 the Board of Trustees has created a
Learning Partners Committee within the
Board of Trustees
 the 2007 – 2009 edition of the Strategic
Plan will include a new strategic
direction: to develop a regionally
recognized Learning Partners Program
STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AT LC
[2004-2006 plan/ revised 2006]
TO CONTINUOUSLY:
 improve financial strength;
 improve campus facilities;
 manage enrollment;
 create a purposeful academic community;
 develop a regionally-recognized LD program;
 maintain a civil and supportive learning
environment;
 improve information technologies;
 improve communications, both internal and
external;
 strengthen the relationship with the
congregations of The United Methodist Church
Hoshin Planning is Data-Driven



It is important to remember that Edwards
Deming, the father of the QI movement,
was a statistician
For Deming, data must be used to define,
describe and assess effectiveness, but
Improvements should result from the
mind/experience of the workers—not just
from the voice of management
HOSHIN PLANNING


The Hoshin Planning technique is
useful to small, single-purpose
organizations and to large multicomplex institutions
The Hoshin Planning technique can
be used institution-wide or by a unit
within the institution
HOSHIN PLANNING AT LARGE
INSTITUTIONS


Large institutions might wish to
divide into schools, divisions, units or
focus groups to consider a common
issue?
Hoshin planning would be especially
useful to large institutions
attempting to envision their QEP
HOSHIN PLANNING AT SMALL
INSTITUTIONS
Small institutions might choose to
work with the college community as
a whole.
HOSHIN PLANNING AT SMALL
INSTITUTIONS

At Louisburg College, we commenced the
Hoshin Planning process by holding a
College Meeting that invited:



All faculty—full-time and part-time
All staff—professional staff and support staff
All administrators
THOSE NOT INCLUDED



LC students did not participate in the Hoshin
Planning process—although a separate exercise
for them is projected
Trustees did not participate in this exercise—
although a separate/simpler exercise for trustees
has merit—think “trustee retreat”
Staff in housekeeping, maintenance, and grounds
did not participate—although their supervisor did
participate and although a separate exercise for
them has merit
WHY HOSHIN PLANNING AT LC?



On a triennial basis, Louisburg College
defines short-term objectives to help the
College realize its strategic goals
During the 2005-2006 academic year, the
College needed to commence developing
the 2007-2009 edition of its strategic plan
The question: How do we move from
“where we are” to “where we can be?”
ENVISIONING THE 2007-2009
EDITION OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN


The Assessment Committee considered
various options and recommended to the
Administrative Cabinet that the College
commence the process of strategic
planning with a Hoshin Planning exercise.
The Administrative Cabinet approved the
recommendation of the Assessment
Committee.
THE INVITATION
The president of Louisburg College
invited all professional members of
the faculty and staff to gather on
reading day (December 8) 2005 to
consider a single question
The Question
[contained in the letter of invitation]
If you could do “just one thing”
to improve student learning
and/or the learning
environment at Louisburg
College, what would you do?
THE RESPONSE

85 % of those invited (including nearly all
full-time members of the faculty and staff)
elected to participate, including





The president
All cabinet-level administrators
Full-time and part-time faculty
Professional staff
Support staff
REVIEW OF ASSESSMENT DATA

The first hour was devoted to a
review and discussion of collegewide assessment data:

Freshman-year data


Graduating student data


VP for Student Life
Director of Institutional Research
Course completion data

Executive Vice President
THE HOSHIN PLANNING PROCESS
[a review]
DEFINE THE FOCUS—WHAT DO YOU WANT TO
IMPROVE?
ENVISION POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS BY
BRAINSTORMING
RANK THE SUGGESTIONS
IMPLEMENT THE TOP SUGGESTIONS









1–3
1–5
1 – 10
ASSESS THE RESULTS
REPEAT THE PROCESS UNTIL QUALITY IS
MAXIMIZED
ENVISION IMPROVEMENTS


Data fuel Hoshin Planning, but
brainstorming is the engine
The LC facilitator was selected by
Assessment Committee and was




A member of the faculty
A division chair
A member of the Assessment Committee
As a result of prior discussion/decision by
the Assessment Committee, discussion of
suggestions was intentionally limited
RESULTS OF BRAINSTROMING


The brainstorming session generated 119
suggestions for improving student learning and
the learning environment at Louisburg College
At the conclusion of the session, participants
were invited to forward additional suggestions to
the Office of Institutional Effectiveness

Eleven additional suggestions were submitted
electronically

Total Number of Suggestions: 130
THE ASSESSMENT INSTRUMENT
[Step 1]

Using codes, suggestions resulting from the
Hoshin Planning process were initially sorted
according to foci/themes:
 Campus Life [CL]
 Educational Support Services [ES]
 Facilities and Equipment [FE]
 Information Technology [IT]
 Learning Environment [LE]
 Mission and Values [MV]
 Student Engagement [SE]
 Student Learning [SL]
 Special Programs and Initiatives [SP]
HOSHIN ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
The LC Ranking Process: Step 1

Using the initial cohorts (foci), participants were
invited to:



Assign a weight from 5 [most important] to
1 [least important] to each item in each cohort
Rank each item within each cohort from most
important to least important—the highest rank
was equated to the total number of items in
the cohort
Across all cohorts, participants were invited to:
 Rank the top 15 suggestions [15 – 1]
HOSHIN ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING
[statistical analysis]


If the focus of Hoshin planning is “limited”
(e.g., the QEP, improving the senior year
experience), it is ordinarily easy to rank
suggestions—we’ll see an example later
In the LC case, we needed to rank 130
different suggestions in 9 separate and
unequal cohorts; therefore, data analysis
was more complicated.
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
[statistical analysis at LC]





The next few slides describe statistical
analysis at LC
As we review the slides, we shall move
quickly—”labor not” and “fear not”
Montaigne: “By diverse means, we arrive
at the same end (Essais)
There are multiple models of data analysis
The good news--At our colleges and
universities, help is always accessible
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
The LC Ranking Process: Step 2
Original
Cohort
Selected Suggestions
[from four different cohorts]
A
Weight
B
Cohort
Ranking
C
Top 15
Ranking
FE-308
To secure funding for a new science
center
2
7
12
IT-405
To transform all classrooms into
master classrooms
3
7
4
SL-805
To create an honors program
3
11
2
LE-503
To improve class attendance
5
17
10
COLUMN A: Each participant was asked to assign a weight from 0 to 5 for
each of the 130 items. The higher the weight (5), the more important that
item is to the participant
COLUMN B: Each participant was asked to assign a cohort ranking for
each item in each original cohort, with the highest ranking in each cohort
equated to the number of items within that cohort and moving downward.
COLUMN C: Each participant was asked to rank his/her top 15 suggested
improvements overall, starting with the number 15 and working downward
Equalizing Weights and Values
[a prerequisite to overall rankings]










14 items—Campus Life [CL]
14 items—Educational Support [ES]
12 items—Facilities and Equipment [FE]
13 items—Information Technology [IT]
21 items—Learning Environment [LE]
09 items—Mission and Values [MV]
19 items—Student Engagement [SE]
18 items—Student Learning [SL]
10 items—Special Programs/Initiatives [SP]
130 items--TOTAL
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
The Ranking Process: Step 3
Cohort
Suggestions
[selected]
A
Weight
B
Cohort
Ranking
C
Top 15
Ranking
AxB
Calculated
Cohort
Value
AxC
Calculated
Overall
Value
FE-308
To secure funding…
2
7
12
14
24
IT-405
To transform all…
3
7
4
21
12
SL-805
To create an honors…
3
11
2
33
6
LE-503
To improve class…
5
17
10
85
50
Based on the values placed in columns A, B, and C, values are determined
for the Calculated Cohort Value (Column A times Column B), and the
Calculated Overall Value (Column A times Column C). If no value is assigned
for column C, then there will be no Calculated Overall Value. If 0 is assigned
for the weight in column A, there will be no Calculated Cohort Value and
Calculated Overall Value.
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
The Ranking Process: Step 4
Cohort
Suggestions
A
Weight
B
Cohort
Ranking
C
Top 15
Ranking
Number
of Items
in Cohort
Cohort
Factor
Cohort
Factor
Value
FE-308
To secure
funding…
2
7
12
12
21/12
1.750
IT-405
To transform all…
3
7
4
13
21/13
1.615
SL-805
To create an
honors…
3
11
2
18
21/18
1.167
LE-503
To improve
class…
5
17
10
21
21/21
1.000
The Cohort Factor is used to equalize and rank scores between the various
cohorts. Since the highest number of items among the cohorts was 21, the
number 21 is used (always) as the numerator of the Cohort Factor. The
denominator is the number of items within the selected item cohort. The
Cohort Factor Value is the decimal representation of the Cohort Factor.
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
The Ranking Process: Step 5
Cohort
Suggestions
Selected [4 of 130]
[four different cohorts]
D
Cohort
Average
For
Item
E
Cohort
Factor
Value
DXE
Weighted
Cohort
Average
For Item
Final
Cohort
Rank
FE-308
To secure funding…
34.93
1.750
61.13
11
IT-405
To transform all…
35.62
1.615
57.53
11
SL-805
To create an honors…
51.53
1.167
60.13
17
LE-503
To improve class…
62.84
1.000
62.84
19
After all surveys have been entered, the Cohort Average is calculated to
indicate the mean of that item. The Weighted Cohort Average is the product
of the Cohort Average and the Cohort Factor Value. The Final Cohort Rank is
based on the chronological rank within the cohort. The higher the Final
Cohort Rank value is, the more important it is within that cohort.
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
The Ranking Process: Step 6
Weighted
Overall
Item
Average
Final
Overall
Rank
Cohort
Suggestions
[selected]
FE-308
To secure funding…
19.83
122
IT-405
To transform all…
18.85
120
SL-805
To create an honors…
16.32
117
LE-503
To improve class…
12.43
111
After all surveys have been entered, the Weighted Overall Average is
calculated to indicate the mean of that item. The Final Overall Rank is based
on the chronological rank when compared to all survey items. There were a
total of 130 items on the 2006 Louisburg College Hoshin Assessment and
Planning questionnaire. A value of 130 for the Final Overall Rank would
indicate the item of highest importance to survey participants.
Hoshin Assessment and Planning
The Ranking Process: Step 7
Cohort
Suggestions
[selected]
A
Cohort
Average
B
Factor
Value
AxB
Weighted
Cohort
Average
Final
Cohort
Rank
AxC
Weighted
Overall
Average
Final
Overall
Rank
FE-308
To secure funding…
34.93
1.750
61.13
11
19.83
122
IT-405
To transform all…
35.62
1.615
57.53
11
18.85
120
SL-805
To create an
honors…
51.53
1.167
60.13
17
16.32
117
LE-503
To improve class…
62.84
1.000
62.84
19
12.43
111
The Cohort Average, Weighted Cohort Average, and Weighted Overall
Average along with Final Cohort Rank and Final Overall Rank are shown
together in the chart for the selected items. The chart above is sorted by the
Weighted Overall Average column from highest to lowest value and the Final
Overall Rank is then assigned based on the number of surveyed items.
PRIMARY SORTS

The 130 suggestions were
initially sorted by overall rank—



130 = most important
001 = least important
Codes [next slide] were then
assigned to facilitate sorting by
strategic directions/goals of the
College
STRATEGIC CODES/SORTS
FS—to improve financial strength
CF—to improve campus facilities
MC—to manage enrollment
PA—to create a purposeful academic community
LP—to develop a regionally-recognized LD program
LE—to maintain a civil and supportive learning
environment
IT—to improve information technologies
HR—to improve communications, both internal and
external
UM—to strengthen the relationship with the
congregations of The United Methodist Church
DUPLICATE SORTS


If a suggestion furthered more than one
strategic direction, a duplicate was
created and a code was assigned for the
copy (copies)
In short, the same suggestion could
appear more than once—but it would be
linked to a different strategic direction (or
programmatic goal) and would not
increase the total number of suggestions
PROGRAMMATIC SORTS
Codes (and duplicate codes) were also assigned
to facilitate programmatic/administrative sorts,
e.g. an academic sort

Active and collaborative learning [AC]
Service Learning [SL]
Academic services [AS]
Academic challenge [CA]
Communication Skills [CS]
Critical and analytical thinking [CT]

Et cetera





Utilization of Sorts


On May 11, 2006, a retreat was held to envision
the 2007 – 2009 edition of the LC Strategic Plan
Those assembled (trustees, administrators,
faculty, staff, students) were divided into four
focus groups that corresponded to strategic
directions—and strategic sorts





Finance/Facilities
Academics/Enrollment
Campus Life/Technologies
Communications/UMC relationship
In order to inform the work of the separate focus
groups, each participant was provided copies of
the strategic and programmatic sorts
BY-PRODUCTS OF HOSHIN
PLANNING

Although Hoshin Planning is intended to
help institutions identify and focus on
what is most essential to improvement in
a defined area, the process almost always
generates a number of good ideas that
can/will be implemented by the separate
offices of the institution in a variety of
programmatic areas.
PROGRAMMATIC BY-PRODUCTS OF
HOSHIN PLANNING
Example: IT 405
TO TRANSFORM ALL CLASSROOMS
INTO MASTER CLASSROOMS
[December 2005]
ACCOMPLISHED
[December 2006]
PROGRAMMATIC BY-PRODUCTS
OF HOSHIN PLANNING
Example: MV 610 [Slide A]
TO MAKE CAMPUS CIVILITY A CAMPUSWIDE PRIORITY
[December 2005]
SYSTEMS CONSTRUCTED
[December 2006—next slide]
PROGRAMMATIC BY-PRODUCTS OF
HOSHIN PLANNING
MV 610: Continuous Civility Initiatives
Progress to Date: Effective December 2006
 Creation of Campus Civility Cluster
 Professional Civility-Training for Faculty/Staff
 Civility focus during convocations and orientation
 Transformation of Office of Campus Safety into Office of
Campus Safety and Police
 Development of Conduct/Honor Codes [in process]
 Creation of Campus Civility “brand”—logos, et cetera
 Civility Week
 Campus Litter Lottery
 More rigorous conduct policies (fewer chances)

Et cetera
PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT
[OTHER PROGRAMMATIC USES]








campus life
the first-year experience
the senior experience
study away
student persistence
student learning
academic life
student engagement
The Freshman-Year Experience
[Programmatic Example]


In collaboration with the Policy Center on the First Year
of College and The Pew Charitable Trusts, Presenter X
recently facilitated a Hoshin Planning initiative intended
to generate ideas for improving the freshman-year
experience at University X.
Although the number one recommendation (a freshman
seminar) has not been implemented for a variety of
reasons, nearly all of the other 44 suggestions were
implemented by the separate offices of the university.
Hoshin Planning at a Division I University
[see sample provided]
Ranking of Suggestions for Improving
The Freshman-Year Experience
By Members of the Faculty and Professional Staff
Total Participants (Voluntary): 85
A quality improvement initiative conducted
in collaboration with
The Policy Center on the First Year of College
And The Pew Charitable Trusts
Improving the First-Year Experience
[a simple sort, Example A]


Participants were invited to rank
from Number 1 (most important)
through Number 6 (least important)
Multiple/Easy Sorts: by counts




By Number
By Number
By Number
By Number
1 (et cetera)
1 + Number 2
1 + Number 2 + Number 3
1 through Number 6
Improving the Freshman Year
[a simple sort, part 2]

Significantly, the sort is essentially
the same whether sorted by:




Number 1 only
Numbers 1 – 2
Numbers 1 – 3
Numbers 1 - 6
HOSHIN PLANNING AND THE QEP
Among other things, COC/SACS expects the QEP:


To focus on student learning
To engage “all appropriate campus constituencies”
Hoshin Planning can be a highly effective
tool when used to achieve these two goals.
HOSHIN PLANNING
in support of the QEP

If you could do “just one thing” to improve
student learning at College X, what would you
do?







Assemble all “appropriate” constituencies
Brainstorm
Rank ideas
Focus on the top (1-5) suggestions (without ignoring
routine “improvements”
Assess the results
Improve/Repeat the process
Possible users: All institutions, from small liberal
arts colleges to multi-complex colleges and
universities.
HOSHIN PLANNING
Same Data—Multiple Sorts/Uses

The Louisburg College instrument was
intentionally designed to facilitate multiple sorts
(see samples provided at workshop):





by overall rankings
by strategic directions
by programmatic goals (academic, administrative,
educational support and campus life)
by weights
by themes (e.g., mission and values, student
engagement, active and collaborative learning,
service learning, special programs)
TODAY’S WORKSHOP—PROCESS A
Choose a Topic
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Divide into focus groups—see mint enclosure
Select a facilitator and a recorder/reporter
Expand the list of possible topics—white enclosure, side A
Use Column Three to reduce the list--optional
Use one set of color-coded cards to select a topic

Green = first choice [4 points]

Yellow = second choice [3 points]

Rose = third choice [2 points]

Orange = fourth choice [1 point]
Using the color-coded cards, write the ITEM NUMBER of your
top four choices on the corresponding card—to simplify the
process, use the original numbers even if the group deletes
some items
Sort the cards by item number
Count “total points” for each item [using the point value
indicated in Number 5]
Ordinarily, the item with the highest number of points should be
the focus of your group’s Hoshin Planning initiative [process B]
TODAY’S WORKSHOP—PROCESS B
Hoshin Planning Exercise





Use brainstorming to identify possible actions that would
support the realization of the goal;
Record each suggestion on Side B of the white
enclosure--it is important that participants equate the
suggestion to the same item number
Rank the suggestions—each participant should write the
item number for his/her top four choices on the colorcoded cards (green=4 point/highest value; yellow=3;
rose=2; orange=1 point/lowest value)
Compute the total value for each suggested
improvement
Report the results to the group during Process C
TODAY’S WORKSHOP—PROCESS C
Report/disseminate the results
A DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE
CHOSEN BY THE GROUP
WILL REPORT THE TOP SUGGESTIONS
(4-10, HIGHEST TO LOWEST) TO THE
ASSEMBLY
OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS