🚀 go-pugleaf

Jay Warner said, "The assessment scheme for the Baldrige
Award (Wisconsin Forward Award in my local case) relies
upon breaking down the title areas into small enough pieces
that a rational concessus can be reached by examiners.  Is
that concessus subjective or objective?  The question does
not compute. Which way does it lean toward?  When we then
add up the points for a total, does the net result lean toward
subjective or objective?"

I believe the Baldrige scoring is highly subjective. There is a
strong attempt to give scoring guidelines to help reach consensus
and repeatable results. Part of this is accomplished by quantifying the
subjective measures. Consider, for example, "A sound,
systematic approach, responsive to the primary purposes of the item"
as part of how one earns 40% to 60% of he points in an
approach/deployment category.

This is a subjective measure that is quantified. Compare that measure
to one like "95% of the items received from this supplier wee received
within +-3 working days of the promise date." That is a statement both
objective and quantified.

(I suppose, if challenged, one should be able to produce examples of
the four possibilities or explain why some of them can't exist. Perhaps
later).

Dan O'Leary
doleary@qbe.picker.com