Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSKy273cMhc
CBAR Refresh 2017
CBAR Taskforce
Celeste Ayers
Jeff Ball
Reed Dubow
Michele Lawrence
Leann Goettel
Joost Vles*
*Reports to the District Manager Committee
3 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR (Taskforce Members)
Celeste AyersOrigianl Author of the "Progressive Scale"
100 point scale
CBAR Rock Star!!!
Loves data
Company: Parker Hanifin
Jeff BallProduction Control, IT Systems, Supply Chain
APICS since 2006, Buffalo, NY Chapter
Another CBAR junkie! Saw value in using this type of tool for other organizations too!
Likes the idea of looking at Chapters as Businesses
Progressive scale makes it easier to see what is possible.
Jessica DePintoAPICS Corporate - Senior Manager, Instructor Development
Chapters should receive points for supporting chapter-endorsed instructors to attend APICS Instructor Training classes
(TTT, LDI, AIS) and quality assurance practices (ex. Student feedback)
Reed DubowAccounting by trade (in Manufacturing)
VERY millitant -- say what you do, then do what you say.
Past President of New Jersey
CBAR Junkie
Member of Northeast Team
Leann GoettelAPICS Corporate District Channel Mgr.
Mid-Atlantic & Canada
Progressive scale appears to be a great tool for both Chapters AND Districts
Michele LawrenceCurrent President of North Shore MA Chapter
Strategic thinker
Company: Pfizer
Strucutre and uniformity!
Member of Northeast Team
Joost VlesAPICS since 1990
Past Chapter President of Buffalo, NY
Current District Manager of Northeast District
CBAR Taskforce Chair, reporting to the DMC
Company: Moog
CBAR Taskforce – War room
5 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR Taskforce War Room (Before)
6 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR Task Force War Room
You
submitted
over 100
individual
pieces of
feedback on
what should
be Added,
Deleted, or
Modified.
7 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR Taskforce War Room (After)
8 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR (Progressive Scale Concept)Chapter Officers:
This document is the creation of the 2017 CBAR Task Force. The task force was formed by the District Manager Committee
for the purpose of updating the Chapter Benchmarking and Reporting (CBAR) tool to align with the new Channel Partner
Agreement (PA-17) and to incorporate more relevant issues (I.e. social media and Instructor development.)
During the Task force's time together, it has become clear to us that the original intent of the CBAR tool has been lost over the
years. The CBAR tool was originally intended to help Chapter Officers run stronger Chapters--not simply to earn a grade. The
CBAR scores are for the District Managers and are to be used to understand what areas each Chapter needs develop in. The
details of the CBAR report are never given to APICS Corporate, even though the scores are reported for the purpose of awarding
Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum awards.
With this in mind, the CBAR Task Force has identified a new method for evaluating Chapters that we believe will also allow a
Chapter to see what is possible in each area, not just simply earn a score. We are calling the new method a "Progressive Scale"
technique, a format that many of us use in our businesses today for Suppler Evaluations and Risk Management. The
progressive scale concept will help each Chapter answer the question , "what does good look like?" for each specific criteria.
We have completed about 60% of the conversion from the old CBAR tool to the new Progressive Scale CBAR tool and thought
this would be a good time to check in with you for your feedback. Please review the "Progressive Scale CBAR" tab in the
attached workbook and provide feedback to your District Manager. Tell us what you like and what you think we can do to make
it even better. We plan to release a more complete version in the commit weeks.
Thank you,
CBAR Task Force-2017, Celeste, Jeff, Reed, Leann, Michele, and Joost
9 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR (Progressive Scale Concept)
10 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR Progressive Scale - Handbook
11 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR Progressive Scale – Metrics
12 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
CBAR Progressive Scale – Visual
13 © APICS Confidential and Proprietary
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions Yellow Cells indicate the need for templates and guidelines. Green Cells indicate future enhancements of the CBAR Tool
Item # CBAR Item Description Question Response
A Scoring perfect? It is nearly impossible to get a perfect score! CBAR is intended to show a Chapter what good looks like in every area. It
is was never intended that a Chapter has to be perfect in order to obtain a
Gold award.
Gold = 66 -100%
Silver = 45 - 66%
Bronze = 29 - 45%
B What is meant by "Objective Evidence Available Upon Request?" Too much documentation appears to be required, is this true? No, The only documentation that is required for submittal is the actual
workbook with the self evaluation. It is up to the District Manager to audit
the scores and responses at which time they can ask for Objective Evidence
to be presented.
C Standard Format for submitting documents? For any documents that are requested from the Chapter, should they be in
a standard format?
In theory this would be great, however, every Chapter has its own by-laws
and would be impossible to gain total agreement on formats.
D CBAR vs. PA2017 There are some questions in CBAR that could be scored a "0" (ex.
2,4,9,10,11,17,25) which would be a violation of the PA2017. Why does the
CBAR tool still allow you to get a total score even if these questions are
scored a 0, shouldn't the tool default to 0 until these basic requirements
have been met?
The current tool is not written to exclude any Chapter from completing the
self evaluation and getting a score to help them baseline their
performance. We could look at creating a "Net" score that takes PA2017
into account, but that would come in future versions if the task force
decides to build that logic into the tool.
E District Feedback section (Comments and Scoring) There is no section for the District Reviewer to put their comments or tally
their own score.
Currently the tool is unprotected and therefore comments can be added. A
future solution would be to add a new column next to all 43 questions,
called comments, also could add a District score column in future versions.
F Development Plan Tab in the CBAR Tool In Cell B9 on the Introduction Tab, it states that the Development is also a
mandatory tab, is that true?
No, this should be written to state this is NOT a mandatory tab. This tab is
where your Chapter can record development plans for each of the
elements found in CBAR. This is not a mandatory tab and is provided only
for assistance in organizing your Chapter's workload and objectives for the
coming season. (This will be fixed in future releases.)
G The CBAR Heading, "Objective Evidence Available upon request" (Column
E)
Confusing wording. Yes, this should be rewritten to state, "Objective Evidence to be made
available upon request." (This will be fixed in future releases.)
Other Questions?