Dari Rapat Tinjauan Manajemen XII
Di dunia marketing kita tahu pentingnya kita menjadi orang yang “BEDA” dari kebanyakan orang lain sehingga pelanggan (atau calon pelanggan) akan mendapatkan gambaran karakteristik khas yang kita miliki yang diharapkan juga dapat memberikan nilai tambah. Ternyata, menjadi orang atau sesuatu yang beda tadi tidaklah cukup pada saat ini, kita harus menjadi orang yang “LUAR BIASA” untuk dapat mencapai prestasi yang maksimal di tahun-tahun mendatang.
Wacana yang memotivasi ini muncul dalam kesempatan penyelenggaraan Rapat Tinjauan Manajemen ke-12 (RTM-XII) PT FPS Indonesia yang berlangsung pada 28-29 Desember 2010 di Graha Iska 165, Jakarta. Sebagaimana biasa, rapat ini diikuti oleh para kepala cabang seluruh Indonesia dan tim manajemen FPS Indonesia pusat.
Kenaikan Budget 100%
Agenda rutin penyelenggaraan RTM adalah verifikasi, evaluasi, maupun rencana tindak lanjut (action plan) pencapaian kinerja baik terhadap proses bisnis itu sendiri maupun proses manajemen pada umumnya dalam rangka penerapan sistem manajemen mutu (SMM) yang berdasar pada standar ISO 9001:2008. Sementara itu, agenda RTM di penghujung tahun juga memasukkan aspek perencanaan dalam bentuk pembahasan Budget dan pemastian bahwa action plan yang dicanangkan cabang-cabang relevan dengan besarnya angka Budget yang “diajukan”.
Besaran angka Budget cabang-cabang berkisar antara 30% sampai dengan di atas 2000%. Cabang dengan pencapaian bagus di tahun 2010 kenaikannya tidak terlalu besar. Tapi, cabang dengan pencapaian kurang bagus di tahun 2010 akan mengalami kenaikan berkali-kali lipat. Meski demikian, secara keseluruhan (corporate) kenaikan budget tersebut adalah sebesar 100% (net profit) dari estimasi pencapaian 2010.
Menjadi “manusia luar biasa” menjadi relevan bagi setiap cabang untuk paling tidak mempertahankan kinerja terbaik yang telah dicapai dalam 2010, dan bahkan sangat relevan khususnya bagi cabang-cabang yang masih belum stabil perolehan dan pencapaian / realisasi budgetnya.
Perkuat Diri Masing-masing Cabang
Salah satu hal penting lain yang disampaikan dalam RTM adalah penyampaian rancangan revisi struktur organisasi untuk mengantisipasi hal-hal yang tidak menguntungkan di masa mendatang. Hal-hal yang tidak menguntungkan yang kita ketahui bersama itu misalnya adalah adanya penunjukan agent baru oleh FPS Singapore untuk Bangkok, Durban, dan juga Hongkong.
Terkait dengan rancangan itu, disampaikan juga hasil proses analisis pekerjaan yang berupa uraian pekerjaan (job description). Jobdes revisi ini merupakan rangkuman masukan dari cabang-cabang yang kemudian di-split lagi sesuai kondisi ideal yang diharapkan di masa mendatang. Setidaknya ada 37 pos / jabatan yang telah teridentifikasi dan penerapan di cabang-cabang diharapkan mengacu pada dokumen ini dengan adaptasi sesuai dengan besar dan kapasitas cabang.
Tujuan dari revisi struktur dan refresh jobdes tersebut juga dalam rangka penguatan cabang-cabang termasuk kemungkinan penciptaan bisnis baru.
“Cabang port (cabang yang melakukan konsol, red) tidak boleh tergantung pada cabang lain (cabang supporting, red). Dan, diharapkan nantinya Manajer Area dapat menciptakan peluang bisnis baru”, demikian disampaikan Pak Iskandar dalam membuka rapat dua hari itu.
Pembekalan
Dalam kesempatan RTM itu diberikan pula pembekalan yaitu semacam “resep” bagaimana menjadi orang yang luar biasa tadi dalam dua sesi training : training motivasi oleh Pak Hendi dan leadership training bertajuk “Manager yang Efektif” oleh Pak Oktaf dari OPZ & Rekan Consulting.
Untuk menjadi orang yang luar biasa dibutuhkan setidak-tidaknya :
- Semangat,
- Reputasi Diri (yaitu jujur dan amanah),
- Inovatif dan Kreatif,
- Percaya Diri, dan
- Berani Mengambil Resiko.
(Jaeroni Setyadhi)
Thursday, December 30, 2010
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
ANTUSIASME LUAR BIASA
Tak habis pikir, mengapa massa begitu antusias menonton tim nasional Indonesia pada pertandingan Piala Suzuki AFF 2010.
Penonton begitu membludak memadati Stadion Utama Gelora Bung Karno. Luar biasa dukungan kepada tim nasional yang lolos ke final dengan rekor sempurna, menang lima kali dari tiga partai penyisihan grup serta dua pertandingan tandang dan kandang di semifinal.
Tidak mudah menjelaskan, mengapa ribuan orang bersedia berdesak-desakan dan menunggu waktu panjang untuk mendapatkan karcis masuk. Sulit dijelaskan pula mengapa begitu banyak orang sangat kecewa dan frustrasi sampai melakukan perusakan hanya karena tidak mendapatkan karcis masuk setelah antre panjang dan lama.
Ada yang berusaha menjelaskan, masyarakat Indonesia barangkali sudah terlalu lama haus menonton bola yang memberikan kebanggaan dan kegembiraan. Masyarakat Indonesia sudah lama menanti prestasi dalam bidang sepak bola, yang banyak disukai di negeri ini.
Setelah berkali-kali dikecewakan oleh prestasi tim nasional yang buruk, masyarakat Indonesia seakan mendapat keceriaan besar oleh penampilan kesebelasan Indonesia yang mengesankan sampai masuk ke final. Ekspresi kegembiraan itu diperlihatkan secara mencolok.
Permainan bola sendiri, termasuk banyak permainan lainnya, memiliki daya tarik alamiah, lebih-lebih karena manusia memang makhluk yang suka bermain, homo ludens. Lebih dari itu, pertandingan sepak bola tidak lagi hanya sekedar ekspresi homo ludens,tetapi mengalami evolusi yang mengesankan sebagai tontonan dan hiburan, bahkan bisnis yang menggiurkan.
Sebagai permainan yang mengandung unsur hiburan dan tontonan, pertandingan Piala Suzuki AFF 2010 di Stadion Utama Bung Karno menggeser jauh ke belakang persoalan penting dalam bidang sosial, ekonomi, dan politik.
Dalam pengalaman banyak negara, sepak bola dan berbagai olah raga lain justru digunakan sebagai sarana dan tujuan pembentukan karakter bangsa. Sebab, dalam olah raga seperti sepak bola sangat ditekankan kerja keras, kedisiplinan, profesionalitas, dan rasa tanggung jawab.
Jelas sekali, pencapaian dalam bidang sepak bola atau olah raga lain merupakan ekspresi kemajuan bangsa yang bersumber pada etos kerja tinggi dan kedisiplinan. Maka tantangannya bagaimana melipatgandakan upaya menciptakan kemajuan dalam bidang olah raga. Kemajuan dalam bidang olah raga seperti persepakbolaan akan menggerakkan semangat dan pikiran untuk mendorong kemajuan di bidang kehidupan lainnya.
Harapannya, bagaimana bangsa dan Pemerintah Indonesia menggunakan momentum antusiasme dari pertandingan sepak bola sekarang ini untuk mendorong kegairahan dalam pembinaan olah raga maupun pengembangan berbagai aspek kehidupan lainnya.
Sumber: Tajuk Rencana Kompas, 21 Desember 2010)
Penonton begitu membludak memadati Stadion Utama Gelora Bung Karno. Luar biasa dukungan kepada tim nasional yang lolos ke final dengan rekor sempurna, menang lima kali dari tiga partai penyisihan grup serta dua pertandingan tandang dan kandang di semifinal.
Tidak mudah menjelaskan, mengapa ribuan orang bersedia berdesak-desakan dan menunggu waktu panjang untuk mendapatkan karcis masuk. Sulit dijelaskan pula mengapa begitu banyak orang sangat kecewa dan frustrasi sampai melakukan perusakan hanya karena tidak mendapatkan karcis masuk setelah antre panjang dan lama.
Ada yang berusaha menjelaskan, masyarakat Indonesia barangkali sudah terlalu lama haus menonton bola yang memberikan kebanggaan dan kegembiraan. Masyarakat Indonesia sudah lama menanti prestasi dalam bidang sepak bola, yang banyak disukai di negeri ini.
Setelah berkali-kali dikecewakan oleh prestasi tim nasional yang buruk, masyarakat Indonesia seakan mendapat keceriaan besar oleh penampilan kesebelasan Indonesia yang mengesankan sampai masuk ke final. Ekspresi kegembiraan itu diperlihatkan secara mencolok.
Permainan bola sendiri, termasuk banyak permainan lainnya, memiliki daya tarik alamiah, lebih-lebih karena manusia memang makhluk yang suka bermain, homo ludens. Lebih dari itu, pertandingan sepak bola tidak lagi hanya sekedar ekspresi homo ludens,tetapi mengalami evolusi yang mengesankan sebagai tontonan dan hiburan, bahkan bisnis yang menggiurkan.
Sebagai permainan yang mengandung unsur hiburan dan tontonan, pertandingan Piala Suzuki AFF 2010 di Stadion Utama Bung Karno menggeser jauh ke belakang persoalan penting dalam bidang sosial, ekonomi, dan politik.
Dalam pengalaman banyak negara, sepak bola dan berbagai olah raga lain justru digunakan sebagai sarana dan tujuan pembentukan karakter bangsa. Sebab, dalam olah raga seperti sepak bola sangat ditekankan kerja keras, kedisiplinan, profesionalitas, dan rasa tanggung jawab.
Jelas sekali, pencapaian dalam bidang sepak bola atau olah raga lain merupakan ekspresi kemajuan bangsa yang bersumber pada etos kerja tinggi dan kedisiplinan. Maka tantangannya bagaimana melipatgandakan upaya menciptakan kemajuan dalam bidang olah raga. Kemajuan dalam bidang olah raga seperti persepakbolaan akan menggerakkan semangat dan pikiran untuk mendorong kemajuan di bidang kehidupan lainnya.
Harapannya, bagaimana bangsa dan Pemerintah Indonesia menggunakan momentum antusiasme dari pertandingan sepak bola sekarang ini untuk mendorong kegairahan dalam pembinaan olah raga maupun pengembangan berbagai aspek kehidupan lainnya.
Sumber: Tajuk Rencana Kompas, 21 Desember 2010)
Friday, December 10, 2010
MAJOR REVISIONS TO INT'L STANDARD
Background
Eight years ago, the International Standards Organization (ISO) issued the 19011 standard for quality and environmental management system auditing. It combined the separate quality and environmental management system audit standards into one. Good step. Unfortunately, the pressure to do this was coming from the conformity assessment community (sometimes called registration or certification) and the big multinational firms. The first 19011 standard reflected this bias and the USA delegation voted “no.” It passed anyway. About three years later, the USA released a supplement to the international version, giving additional guidance on how to apply these principles to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and internal (first-party) audits. The ANSI version of 19011, with the supplement, was a market success and outsold the international version by a wide margin.
Shortly after the ANSI version came out, the international committee started its required review of the original 19011. ISO procedures require this every five years, although it is often stretched out longer. The choices are revise, reissue, or reject. It was pretty obvious that the 19011 needed revision. Unfortunately, the international committee was upset with the Americans for making the standard better, so we were ignored for several years. The work stalled until a couple years ago, when some fresh faces joined the group, and USA participation was once more welcomed.
In the mean time, the Conformity Assessment committee decided to take over audit standard development for third-party registration/certification. A new committee (17021) was assigned the task. So the 19011 standard revisions will now cover internal audits and supplier audits. Hurray!
Major Strengths
* The auditing standard now covers all management system auditing: quality, environment, safety, security, etc. This fits right in with the trend of organizations integrating their management approaches. The revision is coming closer to other audit standards, such as the yellow book (US Government Accountability Office – GAO) and the red book (Institute of Internal Auditors – IIA).
* As mentioned above, third-party conformity assessment (registration/certification) audits will have their own new standard: ISO 17021. Publication of the new 17021 will probably occur quite soon, as the people writing it have a common focus and the intended audience is smaller.
* For the first time, the concept of risk appears. This is the risk of performing a bad audit, having incorrect conclusions, and not the risks taken by the auditee. For several decades, the IIA has included the concept of audit risk under their banner called quality assurance. While the concept is only briefly discussed in this 19011 revision, it is a good start for a long journey.
* Guidance on training, competency and evaluation of auditors is greatly improved. Gone are the tables of degree requirements, years of service, audits observed or performed, etc. The discussion is quite rational on what competencies are desired, how to achieve them, and how to measure them. Specific examples for various management systems and business sectors are given in an informative annex. The thoroughness of this information will overwhelm many users who just want to get or maintain their registration certificate.
* Sampling strategy is presented in an informative annex. It covers both statistical and judgment sampling in a non-technical manner.
* Most of the “practical Help” information from the earlier USA additions was transferred to this revision. While the additional material makes the document nearly 70 pages long, it significantly increases the understanding. It should result in better internal and supplier audits.
Major Weakness
* The standard continues to use the term client without clear definition. To say that the audit client is the “organization or person requesting an audit” is unsatisfactory. A clarifying note says, “The audit client may be the auditee organization or any other organization which has the regulatory or contractual right to request an audit.” This makes it sound like the majority of internal or supplier audits are requested by the group about to get audited. My experience says it is just the opposite. We should remove this debris for conformity assessment days and be truthful. Either remove the term or define the client as the person(s) in charge of the audit program.
Next Steps
The international committee has recommended the revision as a Draft International Standard (DIS), meaning all of the heavy lifting is done and the proposal is ready for release to the user community for comment. Our USA delegation meets in November to prepare the USA vote on this advancement to DIS. Unfortunately, the committee team leaders feel the revisions are not ready for the DIS stage. They suggest this draft contains too many new concepts, which may not be accepted by the user community, without stating what might be objectionable. This puts us in a very weak position to affect change. The strengths identified above are needed in today’s world of economic uncertainty, advancing technologies, and ecosystem challenges. Promoting sound management system audits, as described in the draft 19011, will make the world a better place to live and work.
The international working group plans to meet in Guadalajara, Mexico, in early March 2010. Comments will be collected, discussed, and another draft prepared. Once it achieves the DIS (draft international standard) level, ISO rules require it be made available to the public for comment. (Available does not mean free, however.) I am optimistic that the new and improved standard will be released a year from now.
Source : http://auditguy.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html
Eight years ago, the International Standards Organization (ISO) issued the 19011 standard for quality and environmental management system auditing. It combined the separate quality and environmental management system audit standards into one. Good step. Unfortunately, the pressure to do this was coming from the conformity assessment community (sometimes called registration or certification) and the big multinational firms. The first 19011 standard reflected this bias and the USA delegation voted “no.” It passed anyway. About three years later, the USA released a supplement to the international version, giving additional guidance on how to apply these principles to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and internal (first-party) audits. The ANSI version of 19011, with the supplement, was a market success and outsold the international version by a wide margin.
Shortly after the ANSI version came out, the international committee started its required review of the original 19011. ISO procedures require this every five years, although it is often stretched out longer. The choices are revise, reissue, or reject. It was pretty obvious that the 19011 needed revision. Unfortunately, the international committee was upset with the Americans for making the standard better, so we were ignored for several years. The work stalled until a couple years ago, when some fresh faces joined the group, and USA participation was once more welcomed.
In the mean time, the Conformity Assessment committee decided to take over audit standard development for third-party registration/certification. A new committee (17021) was assigned the task. So the 19011 standard revisions will now cover internal audits and supplier audits. Hurray!
Major Strengths
* The auditing standard now covers all management system auditing: quality, environment, safety, security, etc. This fits right in with the trend of organizations integrating their management approaches. The revision is coming closer to other audit standards, such as the yellow book (US Government Accountability Office – GAO) and the red book (Institute of Internal Auditors – IIA).
* As mentioned above, third-party conformity assessment (registration/certification) audits will have their own new standard: ISO 17021. Publication of the new 17021 will probably occur quite soon, as the people writing it have a common focus and the intended audience is smaller.
* For the first time, the concept of risk appears. This is the risk of performing a bad audit, having incorrect conclusions, and not the risks taken by the auditee. For several decades, the IIA has included the concept of audit risk under their banner called quality assurance. While the concept is only briefly discussed in this 19011 revision, it is a good start for a long journey.
* Guidance on training, competency and evaluation of auditors is greatly improved. Gone are the tables of degree requirements, years of service, audits observed or performed, etc. The discussion is quite rational on what competencies are desired, how to achieve them, and how to measure them. Specific examples for various management systems and business sectors are given in an informative annex. The thoroughness of this information will overwhelm many users who just want to get or maintain their registration certificate.
* Sampling strategy is presented in an informative annex. It covers both statistical and judgment sampling in a non-technical manner.
* Most of the “practical Help” information from the earlier USA additions was transferred to this revision. While the additional material makes the document nearly 70 pages long, it significantly increases the understanding. It should result in better internal and supplier audits.
Major Weakness
* The standard continues to use the term client without clear definition. To say that the audit client is the “organization or person requesting an audit” is unsatisfactory. A clarifying note says, “The audit client may be the auditee organization or any other organization which has the regulatory or contractual right to request an audit.” This makes it sound like the majority of internal or supplier audits are requested by the group about to get audited. My experience says it is just the opposite. We should remove this debris for conformity assessment days and be truthful. Either remove the term or define the client as the person(s) in charge of the audit program.
Next Steps
The international committee has recommended the revision as a Draft International Standard (DIS), meaning all of the heavy lifting is done and the proposal is ready for release to the user community for comment. Our USA delegation meets in November to prepare the USA vote on this advancement to DIS. Unfortunately, the committee team leaders feel the revisions are not ready for the DIS stage. They suggest this draft contains too many new concepts, which may not be accepted by the user community, without stating what might be objectionable. This puts us in a very weak position to affect change. The strengths identified above are needed in today’s world of economic uncertainty, advancing technologies, and ecosystem challenges. Promoting sound management system audits, as described in the draft 19011, will make the world a better place to live and work.
The international working group plans to meet in Guadalajara, Mexico, in early March 2010. Comments will be collected, discussed, and another draft prepared. Once it achieves the DIS (draft international standard) level, ISO rules require it be made available to the public for comment. (Available does not mean free, however.) I am optimistic that the new and improved standard will be released a year from now.
Source : http://auditguy.blogspot.com/2009_10_01_archive.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
