Transcript Unit-Based Team Update: UBT Path to Performance Report July 2011

Unit-Based Team Update:
UBT Path to Performance Report
July 2011
UBTs’ Developmental Status and Goals
The 2010 National Agreement commits the organization to double the number of high-performing (Level
4 and 5) UBTs in 2011. At the end of 2010, the number of Level 4 and 5 teams was 329. This means that
the year-end 2011 target for high performing teams is 658. The number of high performing teams as of
June 1, 2011 was 519.
11,000
employees in
329
highperforming
teams
Total number of UBTs at all levels of performance:
3,485 as of June 2011
1
Developmental Status of Teams by Region
UBT TEAM RANKING DATA - JUN 1,2011
Team Rating
NCAL
SCAL
NW
CO
OH
MAS
GA
HI
TOTAL
Level 1
686
336
111
75
14
68
55
13
1358
Level 2
323
375
81
79
19
56
13
2
948
Level 3
232
222
96
62
19
22
7
0
660
Level 4
142
144
93
19
14
7
0
5
424
Level 5
68
11
13
1
2
0
0
0
95
1451
1088
394
236
68
153
75
20
3485
Total
Team status across regions is variable

Variation in number and percentage of high-performing (Level 4 and 5) teams across regions.

Regions with low numbers of high performing-teams are planning more aggressive goals
than the national target (i.e. more than doubling their high performing teams).
2
Improved? By how much?
764 UBTs, or 23% of all teams, advanced to higher rankings from
Q1 to Q2 2011. 236 teams, 7% of all teams, moved down. Of
teams that moved up, two-thirds improved by 1 level of
performance; one-third of teams advanced two or more levels.
7 (1%)
49
(6%)
UBT levels of
improvement:
202
(27%)
506
(66%)
I Level
2 Levels
3 Levels
4 Levels
3
As Teams Progress, Their Vision Broadens
30%
Percent of UBTs with Goals in 3 or 4 Points of the Value
Compass
(2010 and 2011 Goals Only)
28%
26%
25%
20%
18%
15%
9%
10%
6%
5%
0%
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Level 5
Source: UBT Tracker
Note: Calculations exclude UBTs from the Northwest because the region is not yet recording projects in UBT Tracker.
4
UBT Centers of Excellence
Medical Centers with Above Average Percentage
of High Performing Teams
(June 2011)
70%
60%
58%
50%
44%
40%
42% 42%
40%
33% 32%
30%
29% 27%
26% 26% 26%
20% 20%
20%
17%
10%
Programwide
Average
= 15%
Modesto
Riverside
Bakersfield
Fontana
Walnut Creek
Santa Rosa
Northwest
San Diego
San Francisco
Hayward
Hawaii
Woodland Hills
Source: UBT Tracker
Fremont
Mult
Fresno
0%
5