The article reports on the inaugural Australian-American system evaluation summit convened in Wyoming, USA, focusing on the application of system evaluation theory (SET). The think tank noted SET’s efficiency principles and published illustrations are emergency response sector specific and pondered whether efficiency measures could be identified for systems targeting complex social problems. The article describes how the think tank used the concept of system waste as a springboard to identify reworks as a universal system efficiency measure. Reworks were defined as repeating all or part of a system standard operating procedure (SOP) or adding additional steps to the SOP to satisfy externalities to the primary purpose. The article then describes the think tank conclusions regarding the utility of reworks as a proxy measure for the four SET factors influencing system efficiency: training, information technology, leadership and culture. The think tank concludes with a discussion of the cautions evaluators should observe when interpreting reworks.
ArnheiterE. D.MaleyeffJ. (2005). The integration of lean management and Six Sigma. The TQM Magazine, 17, 5–18.
2.
BautistaJ.AlfaroR.BatallaC. (2015). Modeling and solving the mixed-model sequencing problem to improve productivity. International Journal of Production Economics, 161, 83–95.
3.
BautistaJ.CanoJ. (2008). Minimizing work overload in mixed-model assembly lines. International Journal of Production Economics, 112, 177–191.
BennerM. J. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. The Academy of Management Review, 28, 238–256.
6.
BentleyT. G.EffrosR. M.PalarK.KeelerE. B. (2008). Waste in the US health care system: A conceptual framework. Milbank Quarterly, 86, 629–659.
7.
BowenD. E. (1992). The empowerment of service workers: What, why, how and when. Sloan Management Review, 33, 31–39.
8.
BukchinJ.MasinM. (2004). Multi-objective design of team oriented assembly systems. European Journal of Operational Research, 156, 326–352.
DombrowskiU. (2013). Lean leadership – Fundamental principles and their application. In: CunhaP. F. (Ed.), Forty 6th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems (Vol. 7, pp. 569–574). New York, NY: Elsevier.
16.
DynesS.JohnsonM.AndrijcicE.HorowitzB. (2007). Economic costs of firm-level information infrastructure failures: Estimates from field studies in manufacturing supply chains. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 18, 420–442.
17.
EisenbergM. S. (2013). Resuscitate: How your community can improve survival from sudden cardiac arrest. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
18.
EricsonC. A. (2011). Concise encyclopedia of system safety: Definition of terms and concepts. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
19.
FarajS.SambamurthyV. (2006). Leadership of information systems development projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 53, 238–249.
20.
FiedlerF. E. (1987). New approaches to effective leadership: Cognitive resources and organizational performance. New York, NY: Wiley.
21.
FullerF. T. (1985). Eliminating complexity from work: Improving productivity by enhancing quality. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, 4, 327–344.
22.
HackmanJ. R.WagermanR. (1995). Total quality management: Empirical, conceptual and practical issues. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 309–342.
23.
HarperP. (2014). Information technology failure and firm value: Exploring the impact of corporate social responsibility. American Journal of Management, 14, 29.
24.
HicksB. J. (2007). Lean information management: Understanding and eliminating waste. International Journal of Information Management, 27, 233–249.
LoveP. E.LiH.MandalP. (1999). Rework: A symptom of a dysfunctional supply-chain. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 5, 1–11.
27.
LoveP. E.MandalP.SmithJ.IraniZ.TreloarG.FaniranO. (2000). DECOREM: A design and construction rework minimization model. In: AltmanG.LampJ.LoveP.MandalP.SmithR.WarrenM. (Eds.), The First International Conference on Systems Thinking in Managements (pp. 377–382), Geelong, Melbourne, Australia: ICSTM 2000 Retrieved from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-72/.
28.
MarchJ. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–87.
OyewobiL. O.GaniyuB. O.OkworiI. G.IbrahimA. D. (2011). Impact of organizational culture on the occurrence of rework in building project. Journal of Emerging Trends in Economics and Management Sciences, 2, 426–435.
31.
PaquibutR. Y. (2018). A system evaluation theory analyzing value and results chain for institutional accreditation in Oman. Quality Assurance in Education, 25, 161–170.
32.
PattonM. Q. (2010). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
33.
RengerR. (2010). Constructing and verifying program theory using source documentation. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 25, 51–67.
34.
RengerR. (2015). System evaluation theory (SET). Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 15, 16–28.
35.
RengerR. (2016). Illustrating the evaluation of system feedback mechanisms using system evaluation theory (SET). Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 16, 15–21.
36.
RengerR.FoltysovaJ.IenusoS.RengerJ.BoozeW. (2017). Evaluating system cascading failures. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 17, 29–36.
37.
RengerR.FoltysovaJ.RengerJ.BoozeW. (2017). Defining systems to evaluate system efficiency and effectiveness. Evaluation Journal of Australasia, 17, 4–13.
38.
RengerR.GranilloB. (in press). Using systems evaluation theory (SET) to improve points of dispensing (POD) planning, training, and evaluation. Journal of Emergency Management, 16.
39.
RengerR.McPhersonM.Kontz-BartelsT.BeckerK. (2016). Process flow mapping for systems improvement: Lessons learned. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 31, 109–121.
40.
RengerR.TitcombA. (2002). A three-step approach to teaching logic models. The American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 493–503.
41.
RosingK. F. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationshop: Ambidextrous leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 22, 956–974.
42.
SimmonsR. (1995, March–April). Control in the age of empowerment. Harvard Business Review, pp. 80–88.
43.
SmithW. K.TushmanM. L. (2005). Managing strategic contradictions: A top management model for managing innovation streams. Organization Science, 16, 522–536.
44.
SnowdenD. J.BooneM. E. (2007). A leader’s framework for decision making. Harvard Business Review, 85, 68–76.
45.
StareA. (2012). The impact of a project organizational culture and team rewarding on project performance. Journal for East European Management Studies, 17, 40–67.
46.
TeichS. T. (2013, April). Lean management – The journey from Toyota to healthcare. Ramban Maimonides Medical Journal, 4, e0007.
47.
Uhl-BienM. (2018). Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical synthesis and integrative framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 29, 89–104.
48.
VeraD.CrossanM. (2004). Strategic leadership and organizational learning. Academy of Management Review, 29, 222–240.
49.
WidenerS. K. (2007). An empirical analysis of the levers of control framework. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32, 757–788.
50.
WomackJ. P. (1990). The machine that changed the world. New York, NY: Rawson Associates Scribner.
51.
XenikouA. (2017). Transformational leadership, transactional contingent reward, and organizational identification: The mediating effect of perceived innovation and goal culture orientations. Front Psychology, 8, 1754.
