We decided not to include the RADAR scoring matrix based on the rationale that it is more important, for an organisation’s Leaders in particular, to focus on the meaning of the RADAR logic/elements/attributes rather than the technicalities of the scoring. The scoring itself is covered in the ECAT and EAT and, further down the assessment process, scoring is done on the AssessBase, not on paper.

It is also worth pointing out that once the new RADAR Scoring Matrices have been tested in the furnace of the Recognition process, it may be that some small adjustments may be necessary, and it will be much easier to make these changes in the digital world.

This has not really changed. Key Results were those defined by the strategy. The new RADAR still sets them in the context of strategy.

Ability to Achieve offers more of a strategic outlook. Where the 2013 Model was largely a rear-view mirror, the new RADAR encourages users to evaluate the ability to 'get there' and not just reflect on what has been done. Additionally, and expressed in a slightly different way, the Core Team wanted to move away from the term "Ability to Demonstrate" as the Assessors should not only evaluate what was actively demonstrated by the Applicant, but also take into account what they have observed or found out for themselves during their investigations at the Site Visit stage. So what matters is what the Applicant has really achieved (or realised) regarding a certain approach. We wanted to put more emphasis on the real achievement which may not necessarily be so well demonstrated by the organisation.

It was the opinion of the Core Team that “comprehensive,” as a word in English fitted better with “Achieve” (see Q&A 19 above), than “Full”

Simply put, it means to be prepared, to be ready, willing and able to fulfil the needs and expectations of the Key Stakeholders in the future, not forgetting of course the future needs of the organisation itself to ensure it continues to flourish.

When we talk about Direction, this is basically the initial "raison d'etre" and "aspiration" of a system/organisation and the way we try to reach it (strategy). So, it is the mirror for Execution and Results – i.e. the other parts that should be aligned to Direction. That means, that Direction, of itself, does not have to be aligned to itself. Moreover, in the new Model, for the first time, we look into Direction from a content perspective rather than just an approach perspective, so there is no sense in "Flexible" as, again, the “Flexible” applies to the "elements and relations" within a system/organisation (Execution) and not to the raison d'etre itself.

Stepping outside the world of business for a moment and considering the human body may help to clarify. For Agility we can talk about the ability of the body to be ready to move. To be nimble.  Synonyms would be; active, alert, brisk, lively, quick, whereas for Flexible we can talk about the capability of being flexed or bent without breaking; able to be turned, bowed, or twisted, without breaking; pliable; not stiff or brittle. Synonyms would include pliant, supple.

This is context dependent. What is the Clock Speed of the industry sector in which the organisation operates? As an Assessor you are not looking for, nor expecting to see, a “one size fits all” answer. You will be asking the Applicant what it thinks are appropriate timescales and, given you will understand the organisation’s ecosystem, you will then be able to make a judgement call on whether you agree the timescales are appropriate or not.

It is not Either/Or – instead, it is And/Both. Are the trends going in the right direction is one subject, but another aspect is whether the Scope and Relevance of the Results is also revised and improved. More than ever, in the world of today and the foreseeable future, organisations are needing to change quickly and more frequently and so perhaps the Scope & Relevance of yesterday’s measures are not the right ones for today.

An Organisation can be sitting on the largest pile of data in the world but it is useless rather than usable if it cannot be turned and tuned into information for the Leaders in an organisation that gives meaning and allows for the taking of appropriate future actions.  At the simplest of levels, how is the data segmented to best serve the needs of the organisation?

An Assessor and an Assessor Team should be able to make a judgement. We want our Assessors to be “in tune” with the organisation and its strategic ambitions and, in today’s world one might even ask why an organisation even bothers with a 5-year strategic plan? Perhaps this is context dependent? This is not an audit, it is not pass/fail, it is not binary. And at the more philosophical end of the conversation, if the organisation is only entering for an Award rather than to learn then is that the right mentality?

It is not possible to give a “one size fits all” answer.  As an Assessor and part of a high performing Assessor Team, an individual must use his/her judgement based on what the Applicant articulates about its affairs including the ecosystem(s) that it inhabits.

Where is the evidence that the organisation has “one eye on the future” rather than both eyes on the past and the present?” How is the organisation using the power of what technology can deliver nowadays in terms of, for instance, Big Data/Data Set analysis to help it with its future ambitions and to provide a greater degree of certainty.