- Panel members like the assessment tool, particularly the layered structure whereby each core organizational competency is supported by practice guidelines, and each practice guideline is illustrated with a number of quality indicators
- While the majority appreciate the great amount of detail contained in the first draft, many are asking for simplification
- The larger communities and organizations are the most supportive, with smaller ones often feeling overwhelmed by both scope and detail. We will likely have to craft a special version for smaller organizations.
- Panel members are still discussing the rating scale to be used, but we are tending towards keeping a version of the 7-point scale that was originally suggested (7 - excellent, 6 - very good, etc.).
- We will be reviewing the entire framework with the intent of improving clarity and removing duplication.
Several New Core Competencies have been suggested
- Both the Leadership/Management Panel and the Facilities Panel have asked for more emphasis on internal customer service and communication (between departments)
- The Community Building Panel is suggesting restructuring the framework to further emphasize community engagement and empowerment, community governance, and risk identification/mitigation
- The Program Panel has asked for a new competency based on the assessment and evaluation of individual programs or services, and more emphasis on the delivery of program benefits
- The Facilities Panel has also asked for increased emphasis on sustainability, and
- The Parks Panel has suggested removing the nursery/greenhouse competency and building in urban foresty, environmental practices and customer service/satisfaction.
Overall Ratings of Practice Guidelines and Related Quality Indicators High
In general, practice guidelines in all modules have been well endorsed with 85-90% of panelists rating them good, very good or excellent on the 7-point scale offered. Each practice guideline is accompanied by several quality indicators; these have received similar high levels of endorsement (80-90% good, very good or excellent).
Our challenge now is to listen carefully to the MANY suggestions made and begin to craft an even better and less intimidaing version of the Service Excellence Framework.
Most important, the Service Excellence Advisory Team is sincere in its appreciation of the effort that so many have invested to get us on the right track, add quality and enhance utility of the Framework. The great support we have experienced illustrates the importance of this initiative - and getting it right!