This document is needed to adequately shift perspective from an initial cycle of the "Change Management System" to subsequent iterations. The activities included in the Annual Maintenance Program will depend heavily on the results of one or more diagnostic indicators. The following guidance also depends on the level of development of a functioning internal facilitation team.

After browsing through the recommendations included in this proposal, use section "F" and the attached facsimile to begin creating the Annual Maintenance Plan.

1. Workforce Survey. It is recommended that client organizations repeat the initial data collection effort every 12 months using a majority of the same survey items as on the initial baseline survey. This all-personnel activity is designed to calculate improvements (or degradations) in cultural capacity and translate that information into financial data that can be used in the decision-making process (continue, change, stop). The subsequent surveys ought to be completed at the same time of year as the original survey and under generally the same conditions as the original survey. It is reasonable to add items that may be of special interest from one year to the next and/or delete items that are no longer useful. See the reference titled "Creating and Recreating Data Collection Instrumentation."

2. RGB Technology. It is recommended that every 12 months (at minimum) each employee update their RGB Profile, review the work group RGB Composite Profile, and revisit their Matching Tasks with Talent (MTT) Analysis. As organizations grow and adjust, the tasks assigned to people also ebb and flow. Periodically refining the "fit" between individual talent preferences, group dynamics, and tasks required for successful on-the-job performance is the single most productive strategy to improve cultural capacity, yet often the least engaged.

3. Leadership, Management, Supervisory (LMS) Profile. The LMS Profile gathers information from significant individuals who influence the success of any leader, manager, or supervisor in the organization. This feedback information may come from superiors, subordinates, peers, customers, vendors, family members, members of any professional network, and even friends. The goal is for an individual to acquire feedback from these multiple sources for the purpose of self-improvement.

1. Spring – 1½ Day Planning (Red/Blue). The Spring Retreat focuses on the Realignment Model. During the retreat, participants review and modify overall direction of the organization. This includes revisiting Beliefs Set topics such as: Purpose, Missions, and Vision. Strategy Bridge topics include: Scenario, Advantages, Benefits, Initiatives, Products and Services, and Priorities. Work Regimen topics include: Programs (core processes structure), and Goals. From a Balanced Scorecard perspective, the Spring Retreat focuses more on Customer, Financial, and on "hard" Business Process concerns in both "lag" and "lead" categories.

2. Fall – 1½ Day Alignment (Green). The Fall Retreat focuses on the means of achieving overall direction - the quality of those relationships that must be healthy for the organization to thrive. This includes the Beliefs Set topics: Values. Strategy Bridge topics include: Standards and the impact of Priorities on cultural capacity. The Work Regimen topics include: the cultural capacity that emerges from Program interaction between people, individual and team objectives, and required tasks. From a Balanced Scorecard perspective, the Fall Retreat focuses more on the people end of Learning and Growth, and on the "soft" Business Process interaction that yields cultural capacity.

Note: Spring and Fall focus may reverse based on budget cycle and/or Scorecard needs.

1. Scorecard Metrics. Whole organization strategic initiatives can be "rolled-up" to ten or fewer critical success elements that help determine if the organization is on track to achieving the purpose for which it was intended. Within each Scorecard perspective, a complete examination of initiatives is easily accomplished.

2. Project, Process, and/or Initiative Metrics. Limited duration projects or initiative metrics are used to track and often predict success or shortfall. Below are potential uses:

• of specific projects (such as the addition of a new product line),
• the effectiveness of core processes (such as the creation of a museum exhibition), and/or
• the on-target performance of specific initiatives (such as the reduction of personnel turnover).

3. Survey Follow-through Metrics. These metric options track the performance of specific survey items that are being addressed by the organization to determine improving or declining trends each quarter.

a. Template A – Low Items. Normally the low one or two items in each UHS Element are "extracted" to create a separate survey. This periodic metric is then used to help determine if the organization is improving, staying about the same, or declining on those specific items. The use of this kind of periodic metric provides some advance warning that can help determine if the strategies in use are actually working as intended. This warning is of particular merit when the strategies have been formulated based on the "low" element items.

b. Template B – UHS Action Tracking. A second or additional option for periodic metrics is the independent evaluation completed, not based on the conditions that prevail, but based on the activities being undertaken. An external consultant or an internal resource completes the metric based on activities that, if engaged, would reasonably create improvements. The notion is, of course, that if the organization is doing nothing or insufficiently engaged in the right activities that would promote positive change, improvements can hardly be expected.

c. Template C – Systemic Initiatives Approach. Using this metric template, those who respond are given an activity scenario (a description of an activity that has been undertaken to promote improvements) and asked to respond to that description in several ways. When used effectively, decision-makers can learn if the activities are "registering" with the workforce, and if the activities are deemed to be an appropriate response by management to expressed concerns.

1. Leadership Teams (1½ Days). The primary concern at the leadership team level is the continuous improvement of the Cohesion Index – understanding how the organization (as a system) runs, and developing a consistent approach to continuous improvement. Leadership teams include the executives close to the "top" of the organization chart, as well as team leaders close to the front line where customers are served. The use of CapacityWare™ Technology is one body of literature that can be used in this learning process, but it is not the only literature. Any contemporary literature may provide a backdrop or lens through which learning can be stimulated. Engaging in regular dialog about important and relevant topics serves to enhance and sustain "Ideal" capacity.

2. Team Facilitation (1½ to 3 Days). Team Facilitation training is conducted in two configurations. The first configuration is a 3-day basic course that deals primarily with the small group environment. The second configuration is tailored to the needs of a particular client organization (or combination of client organizations). The tailored configuration may also be accomplished in regular periodic visits covering – one or two topics during each visit. The important point that separates these two configurations is the imparting of a common basic knowledge during the first 3-day course, and the tailored presentations that are completed subsequently when the facilitator has accumulated some practical experience and developed a "specialty." We recommend that approximately 10% of the organization undergo basic facilitation training as quickly as possible and that the active cadre of facilitators be maintained at that 10% level as a minimum. Prevailing conditions would indicate the need for higher levels.

3. RGB Technology (1½ Days). We recommend that all members of an organization undergo a minimum of 4-hours of Basic RGB Orientation and Training. This provides the organization depth and breadth with a common understanding of the relationships from which its cultural capacity emerges. Under ideal conditions, the organization's internal facilitation team will learn how to present the basic information, become certified, and accept internal responsibility for RGB Technology proliferation.

4. Other (Internal). From time to time other training-oriented requirements will arise and be incorporated into the routine.

1. Event Metrics Review. In order to determine if scheduled activities are performed successfully and are contributing to the overall success of their initiatives, missions, and organization purpose, event records are maintained and reviewed periodically. Some reviews will best be completed monthly while others are more effectively accomplished weekly. We also recommend that topics associated with capacity development be included in all staff meetings at all levels of the organization. The development of capacity is as important as any dialog about finances, for example.

2. Customer/Client Feedback. Customer feedback can be collected and tracked in CapacityWare™ so as to provide the user with invaluable information about the impact of internal cultural capacity on external customers. Although data collection can be continuous, reporting can occur on a regular monthly schedule. Options are available for either hard-copy data collection or Internet response.

3. Leadership, Management, and Supervision. Either as a separate event, or as a part of regularly scheduled meetings, a QWLC Consultant or trained internal facilitator will provide feedback to key decision-makers on organizational status and potential courses of action to improve cultural capacity. This activity is a particularly effective part of the remediation regimen when the "Leadership, Management and Supervisory Cohesion Index" falls outside an acceptable range.

4. Organization Developer and Coordinator. One or two individuals in each client organization take on the important task of synchronizing organization development (cultural capacity development) efforts. The job entails reviewing objectives, measuring progress and adjusting strategies to achieve "Ideal" organizational performance. When a full-time position does not exist, individuals from the facilitation team often rotate through these assignments, requiring periodic orientations and updates.

5. Facilitation Team. Facilitators normally perform their facilitation duties as an adjunct to regular duties. Their initial training as facilitators is a common thread between them, but as they engage within their organization each facilitator will likely develop a specialty - an area within which they have greater comfort than other areas. Future developmental efforts will likely require that individual attention be given in a one-on-one or one-on-few learning environment. Facilitators who have completed the QWLC course on Team Facilitation are always invited and encouraged to attend subsequent sessions to maintain currency.

6. CapacityWare™ Administrator. The CapacityWare™ Administrator is the central internal Point-of-Contact for all matters concerning automated support for the change effort. The complexity of this job is compounded by the fact that new features are constantly being added to the software and literature that supports the change effort. As these changes are made, the CapacityWare™ Administrator may require added orientation on new features in short hands-on bursts and may be informed periodically by other means. Internet assistance is always available.

7. On-call Coaching (as needed). In addition to all the above, conditions frequently arise when people need help formulating an opinion, developing a pivotal strategy, or making a critical decision. The help may be short in duration, but long on impact. The consultation may be by phone, e-mail or in person. The on-call option is a critical adjunct to sustainment.

1. Users. The Annual Maintenance Planner facsimile (enclosed) is used by the client, direct reports, organization developers and training managers, internal team facilitators, and the QWLC consulting team to outline specific activities to achieve and sustain "Ideal" organization capacity.

2. Budget Cycle Integration. Normally the Planner is used in conjunction with routine budget planning. Without set-aside funding in the budget, capacity development initiatives are apt to be funded by using discretionary funds or by gouging other programs that have otherwise diligently survived the budget process (thus justifiably creating undue resentment at the outset - must be avoided whenever possible).

3. Budget Justification. There are two obvious reasons to engage in cultural capacity development work: first, to recover the labor and financial drain that comes with lost capacity; and second, to create synergy so that more can be done with less - more direct labor and more innovation! If a baseline workforce survey has been completed, CapacityWare™ will provide a reasonable estimate of the financial loss (if any) already draining the organization payroll account. Rarely will the cost of development efforts in any given year exceed the financial loss predicted by CapacityWare™. Once lost capacity has been recovered, the sustaining cost is minimal. When used with diligence, the CapacityWare™ event module will track the complete cost of recovery.

a. Preliminary Research. This document needs to be distributed to Users who will be asked by the client to participate in this process. Users must also have a copy of "Smart Tailoring Triage." This short paper provides some added guidance to users that will help prioritize issues surfaced by workforce survey results. Another reference source ought to be the CapacityWare™ report titled: "Comprehensive Indexes" which lists over twenty indicators that monitor the achievement and maintenance of "Ideal" organization capacity. The last survey report that should be consulted is latest QWLC Client C.H.A.R.T (Tab 5 of the Diagnostic Report, and can also be found password-protected on the QWLC web site). The preliminary research would lead individual Users to identify those initiatives listed above that are appropriate for continued or expanded use. The list may naturally be supplemented with other initiatives.

b. Completing the Worksheet - First Iteration. Under the appropriate column on the Planning Worksheet, brief notes can be entered during the first iteration. For example, if the user believes that the Baseline Workforce Survey conducted in January of last year should be repeated next January, the note in "Column A" on the Worksheet adjacent "JAN" might be "Resurvey." Each User requested by the client to participate ought to complete this Worksheet independently. All other months and potential initiatives should be considered and posted to the first iteration. Users should NOT consider the cost of a potential initiative during this first iteration.

c. First User Meeting. A meeting is scheduled so that the Users can share and justify their individual option selections. This meeting may turn into a spirited debate and the use of a facilitator will likely be necessary. To assist, one person (normally from the facilitation team) may be asked to collect the individual Worksheets and create a composite for everyone to view at the meeting. This will save time if the composites are distributed in advance of the meeting. The meeting will also include a discussion and resolution of the "weight" for each activity on the plan. It will be imperative for internal Users to identify which activities are most and least important to achieving overall capacity development outcomes by assigning "weights." When possible all discrepancies ought to be resolved by the end of this meeting. A DRAFT First Iteration Annual Maintenance Plan will result. An entry in the DRAFT Worksheet, Column A, adjacent "JAN" might look like this:

Resurvey

50%

d. Clarify Resource Information. Before priorities can be established, the plan, as initially conceived by the User group, must be resourced. This will require the participation of an internal "financial" expert, as well as a member of the QWLC consulting team. Resources identified will include both internal and external. Since the level of recovery funding is in part matched by the potential payroll loss identified by CapacityWare™, it will be imperative that payroll and other already programmed internal investments made as a result of participation and involvement also be considered. External costs that may have to be absorbed by existing budget allocations would include consulting fees, the cost of software, the expense of travel and workshop accommodations, cost of printing, etc.. The cost and description of each initiative must be linked so that prioritization decisions made can be fully informed. An additional reference for this activity is titled: "Measuring ROI on Cultural Capacity Development Initiatives." A FINAL Worksheet entry might look like this:

Resurvey

50%

I - $1,370

E - $5,000

e. User Group Prioritization. The entire User group may be involved, or a smaller group composed of the executive team may make the prioritization decisions. The priorities will be made on a combination of importance (weight), ancillary organization priorities known by the executive team, and affordability in relation to current loss estimates.

f. Implementation Management. The FINAL Worksheet will shift from a plan to an executable schedule. It may form the basis of a contract attachment that will bind decision-makers. Major initiatives that link directly to strategic imperatives, supported by specific events are entered into CapacityWare™ for the purpose of comprehensively managing the change process. The advantages of this comprehensive approach and the collateral use of CapacityWare™ enable a single-source for information on all organizational initiatives to be "tracked" simultaneously. Competing or conflicting priorities soon become apparent.

g. Formalization. The process described above assumes the likely position that specific budget line-items have not been established for capacity development initiatives. This is highly likely during the first years of an improvement project. As soon as possible, however, this process must shift to routine budgeting practices so that competition between programs is resolved routinely during the budget process rather than as a post-budget-process hostile strike.