2018

Green 

Gateway 

Case Study

manufacturing 

service 

small business 

nonprofit

government

#Baldrige

www.nist.gov/baldrige
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) • United States Department of Commerce

July 2018

To obtain Baldrige Program products and services, contact 

Baldrige Performance Excellence Program

Administration Building, Room A600

100 Bureau Drive, Stop 1020

Gaithersburg, MD 20899-1020

Telephone: (301) 975-2036 

Fax: (301) 948-3716 

E-mail: baldrige@nist.gov

Web: https://www.nist.gov/baldrige

The Green Gateway Case Study is a fictitious Baldrige Award application prepared for use in the 2018 Malcolm Baldrige 

National Quality Award Examiner Preparation Course. The fictitious case study organization is a manufacturer of 

medium-size gas and diesel-power lawn tractors. The case study illustrates the format and general content of an award 

application. However, since the case study serves primarily as a tool for training examiners to evaluate organizations 

against the 2017–2018 Baldrige Excellence Framework and its Criteria for Performance Excellence, it may not address 

all Criteria requirements or demonstrate role-model responses in all Criteria areas. Please refer to the Green Gateway 

Feedback Report to learn how the organization scored and to see its strengths and opportunities for improvement.

This case study is a work of fiction, created and produced for the sole purpose of training regarding the use of 

the Baldrige Excellence Framework. There is no connection between the fictitious Green Gateway and any other 

organization, named either Green Gateway or otherwise. Any resemblance to any specific organization is purely 

coincidental. The names of several national and government organizations are included to promote the realism of 

the case study as a training tool, but all data and content about them have been fictionalized, as appropriate; 

all other organizations cited in the case study are fictitious or have been fictionalized.

The Baldrige Program welcomes your comments on this case study and other Baldrige products and services. 

Please direct your comments to the address above.

BALDRIGE CRITERIA FOR PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE®, BALDRIGE PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE PROGRAM®, CRITERIA FOR 

PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE®, MALCOLM BALDRIGE NATIONAL QUALITY AWARD®, and PERFORMANCE EXCELLENCE® are 

federally registered trademarks and service marks of the U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. 

The unauthorized use of these trademarks and service marks is prohibited.

NIST, an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce, manages the Baldrige Program. NIST has a 100-plus-year track record of 

serving U.S. industry, science, and the public with the mission to promote U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing 

measurement science, standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life. NIST carries 

out its mission in three cooperative programs, including the Baldrige Program. The other two are the NIST laboratories, conducting 

research that advances the nation’s technology infrastructure and is needed by U.S. industry to continually improve products and 

services; and the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership, a nationwide network of local centers offering technical and business 

assistance to small manufacturers.

Suggested citation: Baldrige Performance Excellence Program. 2018. 2018 Baldrige Case Study: Green Gateway. Gaithersburg, MD:

U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. https://www.nist.gov/baldrige.
CONTENTS

2018 Eligibility Certification Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E1

Organization Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O1

2018 Award Application Form, page A-1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A1

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations......................................... G1

Preface: Organizational Profile

P.1	 Organizational Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

P.2	 Organizational Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

Category 1: Leadership

1.1	 Senior Leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2	 Governance and Societal Responsibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Category 2: Strategy

2.1	 Strategy Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2.2	 Strategy Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Category 3: Customers

3.1	 Voice of the Customer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.2	 Customer Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Category 4: Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management

4.1	 Measurement, Analysis, and Improvement of Organizational Performance . . . . . . . 15

4.2	 Information and Knowledge Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Category 5: Workforce

5.1	 Workforce Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

5.2	 Workforce Engagement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Category 6: Operations

6.1	 Work Processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

6.2	 Operational Effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

Category 7: Results

7.1	 Product and Process Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

7.2	 Customer Results.................................................... 40

7.3	 Workforce Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

7.4	 Leadership and Governance Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

7.5	 Financial and Market Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
2018 ELIGIBILITY

CERTIFICATION

FORM



Eligibility package due February 22, 2018 

Award package due May 2, 2018

2018 Eligibility Certification Form

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

OMB Control No. 0693-0006

Expiration Date: 06/30/2019

Page E-4 of 12

j.	 Is your subunit self-sufficient enough to be examined in all seven categories of the Criteria?

	 •	 Does it have its own senior leaders?

	 •	 Does it plan and implement its own strategy?

	 •	 Does it serve identifiable customers either inside or outside the organization?

	 •	 Is it responsible for measuring its performance and managing knowledge and information?

	 •	 Does it manage its own workforce?

	 •	 Does it manage its own work processes and other aspects of its operations?

	 •	 Can it report results related to these areas?

 Yes. Proceed to 6k (table below).

 No. Your organization probably is not eligible to apply for the award. Call the Baldrige Program at (877) 237-9064, 

option 3.

k.	 Does your organization meet one of the following conditions?

1.	 My organization has won the Baldrige Award

(prior to 2013).

Yes



Your organization

is eligible.

No 



Continue with

statement 2.

2. 	 Between 2013 and 2017, my organization applied

for the national Baldrige Award, and the total of

the process and results band numbers assigned in

the feedback report was	8	or higher.

Yes



Your organization

is eligible.

Year:

Total of band

scores:

No 



Continue with

statement 3.

3. 	 Between 2013 and 2017, my organization applied

for the national Baldrige Award and received	a	

site visit.

Note: An organization that has participated 

in the Baldrige Site Visit Experience (BSVE) 

process is not eligible under this condition. 

Please do not check that your organization has 

received a site visit within the past 5 years if 

referring to the BSVE. 

Yes



Your organization

is eligible.

Year of site visit:

No 



Continue with

statement 4.

4.	 Between 2013 and 2017, my organization

received the top award from an award program

that is	a	member of the Alliance for Performance

Excellence.

Yes



Your organization

is eligible.

Award program:		

Year of top

award:

No 



Continue with

statement 5.

5. 	 More than 25% of my organization’s workforce

is located outside the organization’s home state.

Yes



Your organization

is eligible.

No 



Continue with

statement 6.
Eligibility package due February 22, 2018 

Award package due May 2, 2018

2018 Eligibility Certification Form

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

OMB Control No. 0693-0006

Expiration Date: 06/30/2019

Page E-5 of 12

6. There is no Alliance for Performance Excellence 

award program available for my organization.

Yes



Your organization 

is eligible. 

No 



Continue with 

statement 7.

7. In 2016 or 2017, my organization applied for the 

national Baldrige Award through the alternate 

method (option 8 below) and the total of the 

process and results bands assigned in the feedback 

report was 6 or higher. 

Yes



Your organization 

is eligible.

 No, my 

organization did 

not apply using 

this method.

 No, my 

organization 

applied using 

this method, but 

did NOT receive 

a total of 6 or 

higher.

Continue with 

statement 8.

Your organization 

is not eligible. 

Call 

877-237-9064, 

option 3, if you 

have questions. 

8. My organization will submit additional 

eligibility screening materials (i.e., a complete 

Organizational Profile and two results measures 

for each of the five Criteria results items). The 

Baldrige Program will use the materials to 

determine if my organization is eligible to apply 

for the award this year (as described in the fact 

sheet at Eligibility FAQs.

Yes



The Baldrige 

Program will 

review the 

materials and 

contact your ECP 

after determining 

your eligibility.

No 



Call 

877-237-9064, 

option 3, if you 

have questions.

7. Award Category

a. Award category (Check one.)

	 Your education or health care organization may use the Business/Nonprofit Criteria and apply in the service, small business,

or nonprofit category. However, you probably will find the sector-specific (Education or Health Care) Criteria more

appropriate. 

For-Profit Nonprofit

 Manufacturing

 Service

 Small business (# 500 employees) 

 Education

 Health Care

 Nonprofit 

 Education

 Health Care

b. Industrial classifications. In table below, list up to three of the most descriptive NAICS codes for your organization (see 

NAICS list included at the end of this document). These are used to identify your organizational functions and to assign 

applications to examiners.

3524 3331 3339

Eligibility package due February 22, 2018 

Award package due May 2, 2018

2018 Eligibility Certification Form

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

OMB Control No. 0693-0006

Expiration Date: 06/30/2019

Page E-7 of 12

e.	 Provide the title and date of an official document (e.g., an annual report, organizational literature,	a	press release) that

clearly defines your organization as	a	discrete entity.

Title Gateway Estate Lawn Equipment Co. 2017 Annual Report Date December 1, 2017

	 Attach	a	copy of relevant portions of the document. If you name	a	website as documentation, print and attach the relevant

pages, providing the name only (not the URL) of the website.

 Relevant portions of the document are attached.

f.	 Briefly describe the major functions your parent or its other subunits provide to your organization, if appropriate.

Examples are strategic planning, business acquisition, research and development, facilities management, data gathering 

and analysis, human resource services, legal services, finance or accounting, sales/marketing, supply chain management, 

global expansion, information and knowledge management, education/training programs, information systems and 

technology services, curriculum and instruction, and academic program coordination/development.

Invoices, design support, sales/marketing

9. Supplemental Sections

The organization has (a)	a	single performance system that supports all of its product and/or service lines and (b) products or

services that are essentially similar in terms of customers/users, technology, workforce or employee types, and planning.

 Yes. Proceed to item 10.

 Your organization may need to submit one or more supplemental sections with its application. Call the Baldrige Program 

at (877) 237-9064, option 3.

10. Use of Cell Phones, Cordless Phones, and Voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP)

Do you authorize Baldrige examiners to use cell phones, cordless phones, and VoIP to discuss your application? Your answer 

will not affect your organization’s eligibility. Examiners will hold all your information in strict confidence and will discuss your 

application only with other assigned examiners and with Baldrige Program representatives as needed.

 Yes		  No

Eligibility package due February 22, 2018 

Award package due May 2, 2018

2018 Eligibility Certification Form

Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award

OMB Control No. 0693-0006

Expiration Date: 06/30/2019

Page E-9 of 12

Your Organization 

Sites (U.S. and Foreign) 

List the city and the state or country.

Workforce* 

List the numbers at each 

site.

List the % at 

each site, 

or use “N/A” 

(not applicable).

Check one 

or more.

 Employees

 Faculty

 Staff

Volunteers 

(no. or 

N/A)

Check one.

% of 

 Sales

 Revenue

 Budget

Relevant Products, Services, 

and/or Technologies

GG Facility, Kinston, NC 589 N/A 100% Manufacturer of product. 

Major technologies include 

circuit testing, assembly, 

material analysis, in-process 

inspection, and final assembly

Total 589 N/A 100%

*The term workforce refers to all people actively involved in accomplishing the work of an organization. The workforce includes paid employees 

(e.g., permanent, part-time, temporary, telecommuting, and contract employees supervised by the organization) and volunteers, as appropriate; 

it also includes team leaders, supervisors, and managers at all levels.

12. Key Business/Organization Factors

List or briefly describe where necessary the following key business/organization factors (we recommend using bullets). Please be 

concise, but be as specific as possible. Provide full names of organizations (i.e., do not use acronyms). The Baldrige Program uses 

this information to avoid conflicts of interest when assigning examiners to your application. Examiners also use this information in 

their evaluations. 

a. Main products and/or services and major markets served (local, regional, national, and international)

Medium-size gas and diesel-power lawn tractors. Major markets: North America independent dealers

b. Key competitors (those that constitute 5 percent or more of your competitors)

J.J. Place Inc., Majestic Corp., Mighty Mowers Inc.

c. Key customers/users (those that constitute 5 percent or more of your customers/users)

Dealers: commercial and homeowner

d. Key suppliers/partners (those that constitute 5 percent or more of your suppliers/partners)

Suppliers: Cultivars Engines, Core Tires, Earthmover, Furrows, Diatomaceous Earth

Partners: Hardiness and Edger Community College, Metamorphosis and Potent University, CEVA, NIST MEP




ORGANIZATION

CHART
O1 O1

Green Gateway Organization Chart

J. R. Mueller, CEO, 

Gateway Estates Lawn 

Equipment Company

President, 

Bobbie Lee Montero

VP of HR, 

Bob Jones

VP of IT, 

Jose Querteuz

VP of CI, 

Connie B. Smith

VP of Finance, 

Alberto Frontenelli

VP of Sales/Marketing, 

MaryAnn Francois

VP of Global, 

Enrico C. Baldini

VP of Supply Chain, 

Alice R. Williams

Yellow Gateway 

(push lawnmowers)

Green Gateway (GG) 

(medium-size gas and 

diesel-power 

lawn tractors )

Blue Gateway 

(frames for 

lawnmowers 

and tractors)

Orange Gateway 

(large tractors)

Design Center and 

Marketing/Sales 

Division, 

Janice Baldwin

GG Plant Manager, 

Jack C. Paul

Assistant Plant 

Manager, 

Deb Mafrans

Assistant Plant 

Manager, 

Eric Kimzo

Finance Department 

Director, 

Larry Zoks

HR Department 

Director, 

Isabelle Brough

Quality Department 

Director, 

R. J. Meyer

Safety Department 

Director, 

Lacy Fangs

IT Department 

Director, 

Joe Wong

Gateway 

Seven-Member 

Board of Directors

VP of Manufacturing, 

Lee R. Atricuio
PAGE	A-1	

OF	THE	

2018	AWARD	

APPLICATION	FORM

GLOSSARY OF

TERMS AND

ABBREVIATIONS
G1

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

5S a	workplace	organization	method

5 Whys	 a	technique	used	in	the	analyze	phase	of	the	

Six	Sigma	methodology

6S sort,	stabilize,	shine,	standardize,	sustain,	

safety	(a	workplace	organization	method)

A

A3 structured	problem	solving	and	continuous	

improvement	approach

ADA Americans	with	Disabilities	Act

AOS available	on-site

AP action	plan

AR/AP accounts	receivable/accounts	payable

ASQ American	Society	for	Quality

ATD/ASTD/

 APQC Association	for	Talent	Development/American	

Society	for	Training	and	Development/American	

Productivity	and	Quality	Center

B

BB Black	Belt

BFPE Baltimore	Fire	Protection	and	Equipment

BOD Board	of	Directors

BSC balanced	scorecard

C

CAP corrective	action	plan

CC core	competency

COGS cost	of	goods	sold

Cpk process	capability

CSF critical	success	factor

CTB change	the	business

C-TPAT Customs	Trade	Partnership	Against	Terrorism

CTQ critical	to	quality

D

DMAIC define,	measure,	analyze,	improve,	control

DOL U.S.	Department	of	Labor	

E

EAP Employee	Assistance	Program

EEOC U.S.	Equal	Employment	Opportunity	

Commission

EHS environmental	health	and	safety

EOC Emergency	Operations	Committee

EPA U.S.	Environmental	Protection	Agency

ERP enterprise	resource	planning

F

FEMA Federal	Emergency	Management	Agency

FLSA Fair	Labor	Standards	Act

FMEA failure	mode	effects	analysis

FMLA Family	and	Medical	Leave	Act

G

GAAP generally	accepted	accounting	principles

GATE supplier	portal

Gateway Gateway	Estates	Lawn	Equipment	Company	

(parent	organization)

GB Green	Belt

GED General	Equivalency	Diploma	test	

(for	high	school	equivalency)

Gemba the	place	where	value	is	created;	in	

manufacturing,	the	Gemba	is	the	factory	floor

GG Green	Gateway

H

HR human	resources

I

IA inherent	availability

IRS U.S.	Internal	Revenue	Service

ISO International	Organization	for	Standardization

IT information	technology

IW Industry Week

J

Jidoka one	of	the	two	pillars	of	the	Toyota	Production	

System

JIT just	in	time

JSOX Japan’s	Financial	Instruments	and	Exchange	

Law	(considered	the	Japanese	version	of	

Sarbanes-Oxley)
G2

K

KAIZEN Japanese	word	for	“continuous	improvement”

Kanban a	method	for	managing	the	creation	of	products	

with	an	emphasis	on	continual	delivery	and	

optimization	of	the	flow	of	work

KM knowledge	management

KPI key	performance	indicator

KSA knowledge,	skills,	and	abilities

L

LSS Lean	Six	Sigma

LT long	term

M

MBWA management	by	wandering	around

MEP Manufacturing	Extension	Program

MIR Market	Impact	Report/Monthly	Index	Review

MTBF mean	time	between	failures

MTTR mean	time	to	repair

MVV mission,	vision,	and	values

N

NCDENR North	Carolina	Department	of	Environment	and	

Natural	Resources

NIMS National	Incident	Management	System

NIST National	Institute	of	Standards	and	Technology

NM nanometer

NPS net	promoter	score

O

OEE overall	equipment	effectiveness

OFIs opportunities	for	improvement

OPEI Outdoor	Power	Equipment	Institute

OSHA Occupational	Safety	and	Health	Administration	

OT overtime

OTJ on	the	job

P

PDR plus/delta/results:	yearly	improvement	of	process	

to	ensure	learning

PES Performance	Evaluation	System

PMES Performance	Measurement	System

PMS Performance	Management	System

Poka-yoke any mechanism in a Lean manufacturing process

that helps an equipment operator avoid (yokeru)

mistakes (poka)

PPW Performance Projection Worksheet

PTO power take-off

Q

QRM quality risk management

R

RCM reliability-centered maintenance

ROI return on investment

RTB run the business

S

SA strategic advantage

SC strategic challenge

SCM supply-chain management

SHRM Society for Human Resources Management

SIC Standard Industrial Code

SIPOC suppliers, inputs, process, outputs, customers

SLT Senior Leadership Team

SMEs subject-matter expert

SO strategic objective

SOAR strengths, opportunities, aspirations, results

SP Strategic Plan

SPARC sharing, promoting, recognizing creativity

SPP Strategic Planning Process

SQDCPME safety, quality, delivery, cost, people,

maintenance, environment

SQL standard language for storing, manipulating, and

retrieving data in databases

ST short term

SWOT strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats

T

TEEP total effective equipment performance

TGW things gone wrong

TOC Theory of Constraints

V

VOC voice of the customer

VPP Voluntary Protection Program

VSM value stream mapping
ORGANIZATIONAL

PROFILE
Organizational Profile

P.1 Organizational Description

Founded in 1987, Gateway Estates Lawn Equipment Company

(Gateway), designs, engineers, manufactures, sells, and services

a comprehensive line of mowing equipment sold throughout the

world. Green Gateway (GG) is one Gateway’s four company

divisions. GG manufactures medium-size gas and diesel-power

lawn tractors in Kinston, NC. Our tractors are widely utilized

for commercial lawn maintenance and households with estate

acreage. The GG facility began producing tractors in 2004. Since

that time, our facility footprint increased from 300,000 to 600,000

square feet, and we have totally reconfigured the tractor assembly

process. GG manufactures the product and ships to dealerships,

primarily in North America, based on invoices provided by the

sales team from Gateway. CEVA, a logistics company, delivers

products from the factory floor to our dealer network. These

independent dealerships sell our tractors directly to end-users.

These dealerships are also the maintenance, service, and repair

facilities for customers. Dealers usually handle at least one other

product line in addition to GG products. For instance, dealers may

sell farm tractors, lawn and garden tractors, or lawn care equipment from other sources.

GG’s parent company is publicly traded on the NASDAQ. Four

assembly and manufacturing plants, under the Gateway umbrella,

are located in St. Louis, MO; Kinston, NC; Camarillo, CA; and

Providence, RI. Specialized plants exist in Cartagena, Colombia;

Monterey, Mexico; and Auckland, New Zealand, where minor

assembly is accomplished. Outside the United States, Gateway

commercial sales focus on the top 100 golf courses in the world,

primarily located in New Zealand, the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Canada, the United Arab Emirates, South Africa, Australia,

Ireland, England, and Scotland. In the United States, Gateway’s

market focus is in the states in which the sport of golf is popular.

The top ten states are California, North Carolina, Florida, New

York, Massachusetts, Georgia, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Rhode

Island, and Washington, D.C. These are also the areas where the

largest concentration of historic estates and other large lawn and

garden areas are found.

P.1a Organizational Environment

P.1a(1) GG provides medium-size gas and diesel-power lawn

tractors in three classes: homestead, commercial, and putting

green (Figure P.1-1). Some have the options of zero-turn-radius

models, standard traction assist, tilt steer, and front and rear power

take-offs (PTOs).

P.1a(2) Successful execution

of our mission enables us to

grow profitably and provide

increasing opportunity,

rewards, and security for

all who are involved in our

business while fulfilling the

expectations of our stakeholders. The mission, vision, and

values (MVV; Figure P.1-2)

establish the foundation of GG’s culture of excellence and focus

the company on delivering the highest levels of medium-size gas

and diesel-power lawn tractors and dealer support.

GG has a culture of performance excellence with an integrated

SQDCPME Scorecard, which keeps focus on the vital components of a sustainable business: Safety, Quality, Delivery, Cost,

Morale (People), Maintenance, and Environment (Figure P.1-3).

This focus provides ever-increasing value to customers, while

improving organizational effectiveness and providing learning for

the workforce and company. GG has identified four core competencies (Figure P.1-4).

P.1a(3) GG’s paid workforce consists of approximately 560

full-time employees (called associates), who are organized by

department. Figure P.1-5 shows GG’s paid workforce profile by

segments. There are no organized bargaining units at GG.

GG surveys all segments of the workforce at systematic intervals

to determine the levels of associate satisfaction and engagement

necessary to achieve our mission. The key elements that engage

i
all associates to achieve our mission are participation in Learning

Communities, comprehensive training programs, rewards and

recognition, and a focus on SQDCPME.

Individual job descriptions and competency-based orientations are

used to communicate position-dependent requirements. Extensive

training on personal and environmental safety is required at

employment and annually thereafter. Associates complete annual

safety training and competency demonstrations as needed for

specific job roles.

The workforce composition includes tenured associates, with

approximately 33 percent employed for ten years or more. In addition, approximately 5 percent of the workforce is temporary; this

percentage has been stable over the last several years. Educational

requirements, minimum competencies, and capacity analysis are

detailed in the job descriptions.

GG’s special health and safety requirements include a safe

work environment, protection from injury, and support for a

healthy lifestyle. GG utilizes its employee Safety Committee and

Risk Management Committee to ensure workplace safety and

compliance with Occupational Safety and Health Administration

(OSHA) requirements. GG provides annual workplace safety

training for all associates. Several departments also require that

associates utilize adequate personal protective equipment, obtain

specialized safety training and/or certifications, and put additional

security measures in place to ensure protection from injury and

a safe work environment. GG supports a healthy lifestyle by

providing associates with a comprehensive wellness program

and requiring that physical requirements be met, according to

job descriptions. See Figure P.1-6 for key workforce engagement

factors.

P.1a(4) GG’s major facility is the Kinston, NC, plant. Key to

the efficient delivery of products are several major technological

processes, including circuit testing, assembly, material analysis,

in-process inspection, and final assembly. Major equipment

includes manufacturing equipment, backup power generators,

IT servers, test products, logistics equipment, and forklifts.

P.1a(5) GG operates in an intense legal and regulatory environment, complying with and/or exceeding state and national laws,

regulations, and standards. In addition, GG pursues voluntary

International Organization for Standardization (ISO) certifications

in support of its MVV and core competencies.

ii
GG complies with state and national OSHA requirements and

has been recognized with the GREAT! Award in 2015, 2016, and

2017 for the dramatic decline in warehouse incidents as a result

of improved forklift training. Gateway also has been recognized

in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Waste Wise

Program with Gold Achievement in 2014 for Recycling in the

Workplace and in 2015 for Industrial Materials Recycling. In

2016, GG received the Governor’s Environmental Stewardship

Award and the National Environmental Excellence Award.

In 2009, GG was certified to ISO 9001 and ISO 14001 for its

environmental management, and it continues to maintain those

certifications (Figure P.1-7).

P.1b Organizational Relationships

P.1b(1) GG’s parent, Gateway, became independently traded

on the NASDAQ in 2011. There are four operating divisions of

Gateway. GG manufactures medium-size gas and diesel power

tractors; Yellow Gateway manufactures push lawnmowers;

Orange Gateway produces riding lawnmowers; and Blue Gateway

produces frames for lawnmowers and tractors. There is also a

Design Center and Marketing/Sales Division run by Gateway.

Gateway maintains a seven-member Board of Directors (BOD)

that provides overall governance. Gateway’s Senior Leadership

Team (SLT) includes nine officers who deliver strategic direction

and capital expense approval to all divisions, including GG.

The team includes the President, Vice President (VP) of Human

Resources (HR), VP of Information Technology (IT), VP of

Continuous Improvement, VP of Finance, VP of Sales/Marketing,

VP of Global, VP of Manufacturing, and VP of Supply Chain. One

of the nine officers, the VP of Manufacturing, provides oversight

to GG’s Plant Manager. The VP of Manufacturing supervises and

evaluates all manufacturing Plant Managers. SQDCPME data

are reviewed monthly by the Gateway SLT. All work and support

process owners report to their respective Plant Managers.

The GG SLT consists of the Plant Manager, Assistant Plant

Managers, and five Department Directors. Members of the SLT

have clearly defined roles organized by departments (see organization chart). They guide the day-to-day operations and manage the

delivery of products according to standards and internal policies.

To ensure the enhancement of customer satisfaction and provide

efficiency of operation, Gateway has identified certain global

processes:

■	 All manufacturing plants will maintain ISO 9001 and

ISO 14001 (environmental) certification and comply with

state-mandated regulations and laws.

■	 Plant Managers, hired by the VP of Manufacturing, can

deviate from some global requirements, upon approval.

P.1b(2) GG operates in a highly competitive market and with

customers who have changing requirements. Figure P.1-8 show

our markets, customers, and stakeholders, along with their

requirements and expectations for products, support services,

and operations. It also outlines any differences in requirements

and expectations among these groups. Our key market segments

are the industry segments in the Standard Industrial Code (SIC)

Industry Group 352: Farm and Garden Machinery and Equipment

(3524 Lawn and Garden Tractors and Home Lawn and Garden

Equipment). The key requirements for these segments include

low cost of operations, meeting industry standards, warranty and

quality, ergonomics, and energy efficiency.

P.1b(3) GG maintains effective relationships with key partners

and suppliers that support SQDCPME metrics and our vision (see

Figure P.1-9 and 6.1c). We leverage their critical roles in helping

to deliver on our mission through innovative processes, assurance

of product availability, continuous process improvements, and

timely communication.

To promote innovation, GG solicits input from key suppliers and

partners on new product offerings or improvements/enhancements

to current products and/or processes. Key suppliers and partners

promote innovation by bringing forward product/process improvement ideas and techniques; innovation is acted on through the

Action Plan Team members. New ideas in the pipeline ensure that

GG maintains a future focus and increased efficiency in process

operations. For example, our community college partner maintains a key role in organizational innovation through the development of new curriculums to sustain our current core competencies

and develop future core competencies for workforce education.

To enhance competitiveness, GG focuses suppliers, partners, and

iii
stakeholders on SQDCPME, with metrics cascading throughout

the plant. We use Lean Six Sigma (LSS) to drive out waste in our

key processes and those of key suppliers.

P.2 Organizational Situation

P.2a Competitive Environment

P.2a(1) GG is the third-leading manufacturer of medium-size gas

and diesel-power lawn tractors in North America. An estimated

3,815,000 lawn tractors are in operation, with a yearly growth

factor of 15%, generating highly profitable revenue. Manufacturing is performing at high levels and focused on continuous

improvement.

P.2a(2) Key changes affecting our competitive position are

related to our off-shore competition:

■	 The improving product quality of off-shore competition has

adversely impacted the perception by potential customers of

our value proposition, making them increasingly less willing to

pay a premium for our “made in the USA” product.

■	 Our recent introductions of new product features have

been quickly copied by the competition, resulting in those

features being considered standard equipment within a single

model year.

Opportunities for innovation

are directly related to driving

systematic processes to

collaborate with our suppliers

and partners to develop new

ideas (see Figure P.1-9).

For example, driverless

mowers and hybrid power

are future innovations under

consideration.

P.2a(3) GG leverages comparative data from inside and

outside manufacturing to help

senior leaders and associates

identify the best path for

future investment and growth.

Through the Balanced Scorecard (BSC) Process, senior

leaders set expectations based

on regional, national, and

comparative benchmarking

data. For supplier selection,

the Finance Department

analyzes the supply industry’s

capabilities to understand

potential suppliers, their

performance and cost from

industry data collection and

analysis, and benchmarking.

Two limitations of comparative data are timeliness,

with data typically lagging

by more than a year, and

applicable best-in-class data,

iv
due	to	differences	in	methods,	standards	for	data	collection,	and	

concern	for	proprietary	information.	The	availability	of	competitive	data	is	limited	due	to	being	either	a	subunit	of	a	large	publicly	

traded	corporation,	whose	results	are	not	segmented	by	the	

parent’s	reports,	or	a	privately	held	company	that	typically	does	

not	share	information.

P.2b Strategic Context

GG’s	key	strategic	advantages	(SAs)	and	strategic	challenges	(SCs)

are	addressed	through	our	strategic	objectives	(SOs;	Figure	2.1-3).

P.2c Performance Improvement System

Our	GG	Performance	Improvement	System	is	dynamic	and	an	

inherent	component	in	our	fully	integrated	ISO	Management	

System. The overall process improvement methodology used

is DMAIC (define, measure, analyze, improve, control). The

data-driven improvement cycle is used to improve, optimize,

and stabilize processes, while rooting out and eliminating the

causes of defects. Using DMAIC, we identify, monitor, and

control variation. DMAIC is not only a core improvement tool

used to improve processes but also a common language and

approach to understand problems. In addition, Lean thinking

is used to remove waste from processes by using the toolbox

of Lean techniques and theory of constraints to successively

remove the obstacles to flow.

Learning is shared throughout the company with the SharePoint

Knowledge Management Portal, master index, Learning Communities, Six Sigma teams, Lean leaders, and Production Flow Process Teams. Knowledge is shared at the individual and department

levels through systematic, outcome-driven meetings. Corrective

action plans (CAPs) also assist

management in systematically

addressing issues.

Developing innovative

solutions is an essential part of

GG’s MVV. The key elements

of our performance improvement system continually

reinforce systematic processes;

key elements include the BSC,

SQDCPME, and key performance indicators (KPIs), which

are required for the company to

be successful.

v
RESPONSES

ADDRESSING ALL

CRITERIA ITEMS
1

Category 1: Leadership

1.1 Senior Leadership

1.1a Vision and Values 

1.1a(1) The SLT sets our MVV in step 1.1 of the Strategic

Planning Process (SPP; Figure 2.1-1). During this process,

SLT members assess the strengths and gaps in our capabilities,

demonstrated in our work systems and SQDCPME, in addition

to our shared vision of the future and market conditions. If

the MVV needs to be updated or changed, key stakeholders are involved through key communication mechanisms.

Deployment of the MVV is through the verbal and written

connections SLT members always make when (1) setting or

reviewing meeting agendas to connect what we are doing

to why it is important (see meeting structure [Figure 1.1-1],

(2) conducting strategic planning, (2) reviewing progress of

action plans (APs) and data with teams, and (4) conducting

performance reviews and reward/recognition activities. The

SLT also deploys the MVV through implementation of Master

Supplier Agreements; use of the ISO format for policies and

procedures, and connection of the MVV in “Purpose”; and

transparent annual reports that incorporate, reflect, and report

on progress in achieving our MVV principles and goals.

SLT members’ personal actions reflecting a commitment to

our values include (1) modeling use of the problem solving

methodology (Think Critically) in meetings and when collaborating on teams with associates, suppliers, partners, and

stakeholders working toward common goals; (2) demonstrating the Coaching Kata during all meetings (Lead), as appropriate; (3) leading with integrity and building trust in all human

interactions (Respect Others); and (4) recognizing associates,

suppliers, partners, and stakeholders for exemplifying our

values (Be Proud). Our values have been improved multiple

times, with the most recent 2016 addition of “Respect Others”

based on building our future core competency (CC): “Value

Engineering.”

1.1a(2) SLT members’ actions demonstrate their commitment

to legal and ethical behavior and promote an environment that

requires it through systematic approaches, including

■ Monitoring transparent and ethical behavior in all transactions through their scheduled (daily, weekly, monthly,

quarterly) and on-the-spot (2017 cycle of improvement

learning) audits and reviews;

■	 Complying with applicable laws (see 7.4a[3]);

■	 Participating in and requiring annual ethics training with

legal refreshers (improved in 2015 to include legal);

■	 Monitoring compliance of internal and external audits

(see 7.4a[2]), and use of the ethics hotline (added to the

scorecard in 2016);

■	 Managing oversight of purchasing and finances with weekly

meetings;

■	 Reviewing the completion of background checks and drug

testing prior to signing off on every hire;

■	 Ensuring that licensure and certification requirements are

maintained when required (added to the Training Matrix in

2014); and

■ Overseeing the Compliance and Ethics Process.
2

1.1b Communication

The SLT uses the Communication System (Figure 1.1-2) to

ensure systematic two-way communication and to engage

all associates and stakeholders; face-to-face and electronic

communication methods are shown in Figure 1.1-2. Annually,

stakeholders, customers, partners, and suppliers evaluate communication effectiveness on a communication survey (Figures

7.4-1, 7.4-2, and 7.4-4). This cycle of improvement resulted in

the addition of text messaging in 2016, based on key learnings

from the survey and key learnings in emergency management

for hurricane preparedness. The SLT communicates key

decisions and needs for organizational change through the

meeting structure, which—through the use of quality tools

(e.g., Venn diagram, Fishbone, Brainstorming, and Affinity

Diagram)—ensures associate engagement, support of the

change, and two-way communication. However, there are

times when senior leaders must decide and announce changes.

This is accomplished during Learning Communities meetings,

all-hands meetings, face-to-face interactions, or small groups,

as appropriate. The SLT motivates the workforce through

one-on-one conferences and small-group breakfast/lunch

events as they connect associates’ work to the MVV, solicit

their ideas, and recognize their contributions. The agenda

for these discussions focuses on workforce members’ high

performance as evidenced by cascading metrics; participation

in and achievement of APs; new ideas submitted or worked

on, and the risk that was involved; and processes to delight

customers. With yearly cycles of process reviews, GG used its

learning in communication tools to include all-hands meetings

twice a year (2016) and weekly Learning Communities (2017);

to change the Leadership System from a top-down to an

integrated approach (2014) and included suppliers (2016); and

to add the Innovation Award (2016) and Lean Project (2017)

award. Additional multi-year examples are available on-site.

1.1c Mission and Organizational Performance

1.1c(1) Senior leaders create an environment that is successful now and in the future by providing leadership through

participation in key processes: strategic planning and action

planning, communication, reward and recognition, knowledge

sharing, learning processes, and continuous improvement

methods. Senior leaders create an environment for achieving the mission and agility through systematic review and

analysis of metrics at all levels of the organization, focusing

on improvements and innovation, prioritizing projects, and

systematically sharing best practices. Agility and capacity

for rapid change with reduced cycle times are accomplished

through a cross-trained workforce, workforce empowerment

to solve problems in Learning Communities, and the use of

real-time data to make rapid decisions focused on SQDCPME.

All learnings are deployed to associates through the communication methods—but mainly through the systematic weekly

meeting and process of the Learning Communities.

Senior leaders create an environment for organizational

learning, workforce learning, innovation, and risk by ensuring

that learning is part of our daily work. GG’s emphasis on Lean

thinking ensures that each individual associate is empowered

to find problems in their own way of

working, solve them, make improvements,

and share them during daily or weekly

meetings. Based on the yearly cycle of

improvement review of both this process

and the Leadership System, a 2016

learning was to develop leaders to act

as teachers of thinking skills. Therefore,

the SLT develops people who challenge

the current state and continually improve

it (Kaizen). They do this by (1) demonstrating respect for people (associates,
3

partners, customers, stakeholders) by allocating time and

resources to ensure learning through training, collaboration on

projects, and best-practice sharing; (2) allowing teams to own

their own improvements and recognizing their successes and

risks; (3) participating in weekly Gemba walks and hands-on

improvement experiments that build relationships based on

trust, coaching, and Lean thinking; and (4) deploying this

learning, successes and failures, and risks taken during daily/

weekly Learning Communities meetings. Further deployment

of learning is shared through the Communication System; for

example, by solving problems at the source through the use

of Lean tools, DMAIC, and TOC; sharing knowledge through

existing structures discussed in 4.2; and reinforcing the application of new ideas and risk taking to achieve breakthrough

results. Workforce learning is further discussed in 5.2 and

innovation in 6.1.

Senior leaders actively participate in succession planning

through the analysis of critical positions and planning for the

transfer of knowledge. They coach and mentor target associates to ensure succession readiness, and annually they assess

alignment of job descriptions to values and core competencies.

To ensure preparedness of the leadership team, SLT members

cross train in all senior leader positions and their direct-report

positions. This ensures multiple choices and perspectives to

ensure a sustainable organization through the development of

multiple competencies (2016 improvement).

Senior leaders develop future organizational leaders by facilitating leadership courses; annually reviewing and updating the

scope and sequence of the leadership curriculum for relevancy;

evaluating results of leadership development through the

level 3 Kirkpatrick assessment; and mentoring, coaching, and

teaching. The SLT mentors future leaders to teach others and

demonstrate that they understand Lean thinking. Senior leaders

engage in quarterly candid conversations with future leaders

on how much time they spend teaching others; strengths

and weaknesses on performance reviews; and individual,

department, and organization results, including customer

engagement.

1.1c(2) Senior leaders focus the organization on action

through performance management, results-based decision

making, and cascading scorecards. Metrics cascade from shortand long-range financial forecasts, goals, and SOs across the

entire organization, through the individual success factors built

into annual performance evaluations. Each senior leader and

associate has goals and metrics that align to the Strategic Plan

(SP) and knows exactly what must be accomplished to achieve

our objectives, customer requirements, and budgets. Senior

leaders review metrics posted in departments with associates

during Gemba walks, review scorecard progress and financials

at stand-up meetings, address less-than-ideal SQDCPME

measures during Learning Communities meetings, approve

DMAIC projects based on data presented and risk assessment,

and monitor control of an improved process based on trending

data.

Senior leaders maintain metrics through daily and weekly

operating reviews and cascade them weekly on posted departmental scorecards. Through the systematic use of SQDCPME,

the SLT sets departmental expectations based on analysis of

results to ensure a focus on creating and balancing value for

customers and other stakeholders. SLT members demonstrate

personal accountability as shown through leadership activities

(see 1.1a[2]) and the Communication System and methods

(Figures 1.1-2 and 1.1-3).

1.2 Governance and Societal Responsibilities

1.2a Organizational Governance

1.2a(1) Gateway maintains a seven-member BOD that

provides overall governance. Gateway’s SLT (see P.1b[1])

includes nine officers who deliver strategic direction and

capital expense approval to all divisions, including GG.

One of the nine officers, the VP of Manufacturing, provides

oversight to GG’s Plant Manager, who supervises, evaluates,

and monitors accountability through the SQDCPME results.

Accountability for the SLT’s actions and strategic plans is

accomplished through (1) individual achievement of leadership

goals based on their performance evaluation and measurement on yearly surveys; (2) achievement of assigned SOs;

(3) financial performance of GG; (4) goal achievement based

on the monthly Market Impact Report/Monthly Index Review

(MIR) report; and (5) success as a coach/mentor in building a

learning organization (2016 addition from cycle of learning) as

evidenced on the yearly survey. Data are available on-site.

Fiscal accountability is ensured by the SLT through a variety

of mechanisms. Quarterly financial statements are prepared by

the Finance Department, reviewed by the SLT, and approved

by the Plant Manager. External financial audits are conducted

annually by an independent certified public accounting

firm. These financial audits also include a review of internal

financial controls and tests of noncompliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements.

Fiscal accountability is ensured through reviewing monthly

financial reports and quarterly audits by internal auditors. The

Plant Manager is fiscally accountable to the corporate leadership, which allocates the yearly budget. The Plant Manager

and the SLT set departmental budgets and manage revenue,

capital expenses, and procurement.

Transparency in operations and selection of and disclosure

of policies for GG’s SLT (Plant Manager, two Assistant Plant

Managers, five Department Directors) are ensured through

strict adherence to completion of required annual ethics

training; accountability to Gateway’s seven-member BOD for

financial and organizational performance; and transparency,

reporting of various audit results, and yearly evaluation for

policy adherence of BOD members and their disclosure policies.

Independence in internal and external audits is achieved by

the SLT’s ensuring a wide range of annual site audits. Types of

audits based on process outputs include quality, safety, training

process, ISO, energy, environmental, and 6S housekeeping
4

audits. Based on a cycle of improvement, voluntary audits

were added for ISO 26000 guidance on Social Responsibility in 2016, and SA 800 Standard of Social Accountability

International was added in 2017.

SLT ensures protection of stakeholder interests through key

customer listening processes; extensive use of continuous

improvement projects; consideration of customer feedback;

and evaluation of performance, as indicated by various metrics. For example, analysis of Homestead customer surveys,

feedback, and complaints trended to show that owners needed

to turn the lawn mower in tight places. We applied our Six

Sigma methodology with a cross-functional team, worked with

the corporate design engineers and suppliers, and patented

the zero-turn mower (Idea Generation). Stockholder interests

are also routinely voiced and considered through the monthly

meetings, surveys, and the annual meeting at the corporate

level. Partners’ interests are a key input into the collaboration related to setting common goals. Suppliers’ interests are

considered during the contract process, during site visits, and

in development of APs.

Succession planning for GG involves selected associates

assuming the roles of SLT members from time to time,

coaching by SLT members, cross training of senior leaders

and directors, and participation in leadership development

programs, as discussed in 5.2b(3). Based on learning from

the yearly improvement cycle, risk analysis of key leadership

positions was implemented in 2016, with further refinements

to include potential retirees in 2017.

1.2a(2) The corporate VP of Manufacturing evaluates GG’s

Plant Manager, who, in turn, evaluates his/her direct reports.

Performance evaluations determine executive compensation

raises for the upcoming year based on achievement of goals.

Performance evaluations are used to determine annual merit

increases using the pay-for-performance policy, which defines

levels of performance that correlate with percentage increases

in pay based on achieved measures. GG sets measurable performance goals annually as part of the Performance Evaluation

Process. (Data available on-site.)

1.2b Legal and Ethical Behavior

1.2b(1) Senior leaders anticipate public concerns, address

adverse impacts, and prepare for concerns proactively with

our services through a variety of methods. Senior leaders take

a proactive approach to anticipate, prepare for, and address

impact on society by integrating the ISO 14001 standards

into our culture and management systems. As part of these

standards, a team of associates routinely monitors and evaluates the products we use and sell for potential hazards and

impacts using the job safety analysis forms and standard

operating procedures. For example, mowers are checked

during the Refueling Process to ensure that they are free from

spills, potential fire hazards, and causes of chemical burns on

eyes or skin. The annual Auditing Process of all ISO standards

is improved yearly based on learning from cycles of review.

This resulted in the addition of 10% more trained auditors in

2017 who calibrated their questioning strategies to find more

nonconformances.

In addition, the Risk Management Committee anticipates

public concerns with current and future products and operations. The purpose of risk management is to identify potential

problems before they occur so that risk-handling activities may

be planned and invoked as needed. The GG Risk Management

Process (see 6.1d) is a continuous, forward-looking process

that addresses issues, both internal and external, that could

endanger business continuance or achievement of critical

objectives. Risk items that cannot be eliminated or mitigated
5

to an acceptable level have contingency APs. The GG Risk

Management Matrix and sample of ratings are shown in

Figure 1.2-1. If risks are identified, controls are put in place to

mitigate the risk. For example, the introduction of the airless

paint sprayer showed high risk for eye injuries from particles,

paint, and spray, along with potential paint injected into the

skin. Trainings were developed, standard work and operating

procedures developed, audits conducted, and the equipment

was inspected after each use. This brought the risk to an

acceptable level.

To prepare for adverse societal impacts through the conservation of natural resources, senior leaders promote environmental

sustainability through the establishment of environmental and

energy programs that are monitored and measured using the

BSC KPIs. We voluntarily participate in the EPA Clean Energy

and Renewable Energy Programs and have been recognized

for improvements (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 awards

available on-site) in water and electric efficiency, reduction of

waste, and increased recycling, which also has reduced landfill

methane (see Figures 7.1-16–7.1-18).

To ensure that supply-chain management does not experience

potential adverse impacts, senior leaders have established

processes to identify ways to expedite and monitor supplier

on-time delivery. For example, in 2015, GG managed an area

of risk that involved the East Coast port closure. Steps were

immediately put in place to ensure that production was not

negatively impacted.

The Risk Committee has established a checklist of preventive

measures and review frequency. Figure P.1-7 shows the key

compliance processes, measures, and goals for meeting and

surpassing regulatory and legal requirements and addressing

risks associated with service or operations; the goal is 100%

compliance.

1.2b(2) The SLT promotes and ensures ethical behavior in

all interactions by routinely communicating expected ethical

behavior during meetings and as standing items on agendas

and performance reviews with direct reports. SLT members

take corrective action guided by the Ethics Policy if a violation

occurs. The Code of Conduct is designed to provide an official

statement of how the company will conduct its business. The

code obligates all company personnel to abide by the company’s tradition of honest, ethical, and lawful behavior, including

the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest

between personal and professional relationships. The Code of

Conduct, which is designed to help ensure that the company

and all company personnel comply with all applicable laws

and regulations, places oversight responsibility at the SLT

level and creates a standard process for the implementation of

its requirements.

The code applies to all GG personnel. Copies of the code are

available on our website, and SLT members review the code

with new associates during onboarding and sign all associate

agreements; a signed copy is returned to them. A 2017 cycle

of improvement was to do this electronically. All associates

read the code each year; must re-certify that they conduct

themselves in compliance with the code and applicable laws;

and report any known violation of the code or any law by any

director, officer, or associate of GG. To ensure plant-wide

deployment and reinforcement of appropriate behavior, a 2016

cycle of improvement established safety, legal, and ethics as

standing items on all plant-wide agendas.

Key processes for enabling and monitoring ethical behavior

are indicated below and deployed through the Code of

Conduct. Senior leaders monitor and respond to a violation

or breach of ethical behavior with corrective actions guided

by the Ethics Policy, which contains the Code of Conduct,
6

including	and	up	to	termination	of	employment	depending	on	

the	severity	of	the	violation.	Since	the	policy	began	and	has	

gone	through	multiple	cycles	of	improvement,	there	have	been	

no	reported	violations	of	the	Ethics	Policy.	Partners,	suppliers,	and	key	stakeholders	are	monitored	through	the	contract	

process,	and	ethical	breaches	would	result	in	contract	termination.	There	have	been	no	contract	breaches	due	to	unethical	

behavior	in	the	last	15	years.

1.2c Societal Responsibilities 

1.2c(1) Senior	leaders	consider	societal	well-being	and	benefit	as	part	of	our	strategy	in	incorporating	the	practice	of	ISO	

26000	Guidance	on	Social	Responsibility,	SA8000	standard	

of	Social	Accountability	International,	and	daily	operations.	

Senior	leaders	also	identify	strategies,	or	initiatives,	to	meet	

SOs	aimed	at	societal	well-being,	as	shown	in	the	environmental	section	of	the	BSC.	This	includes	continued	work	toward	

the	Energy	Star	Program	aimed	at	saving	energy	in	the	plant.	

Baseline	energy	performance	was	established	in	2012,	and	

improvements	have	been	measured	yearly.	We	are	members	

of	the	EPA’s	network	of	Energy	Star	partners	nationwide	and	

benchmark	energy	practices	against	leading	organizations	to	

generate	new	ideas	for	improvement.

Senior	leaders	contribute	to	societal	well-being	through	our	

economic	systems	by	working	with	the	business	community,	

partnering	with	our	local	community	college,	and	offering	

partnership	training	programs	to	associates.	In	addition,	

senior	leaders	support	the	local	high	school	through	offering	

internships,	presenting	at	career	fairs,	hosting	class	tours,	and	

presenting at afterschool clubs to improve the technological

thinking of students and future job placement at GG. Such

support ensures job-ready skills for community workers.

Senior leaders also contribute to social well-being through

emergency preparedness. Using the four phases of emergency

management, SLT members collaborate with county emergency management, the school system, city government, and

citizen groups to ensure integration of a county-wide emergency management plan.

Our Environmental System contributes to societal well-being

through improving and sustaining the environment through

policies like recycling, waste to the landfill, and hazardous

material replacement and reduction.

1.2c(2) Our key community is our county of operation in

Kinston. Areas of yearly support are determined during the

SPP. Senior leaders leverage relationship building, a CC,

by collaborating in emergency management, helping those

in need, and focusing on skill development for youth and

millennials. Senior leaders, with associates, build relationships

by sponsoring the Relay for Life, the Boy Scouts, Meals-onWheels, Red Cross blood drives, and a variety of skill-building

clubs (e.g., engineering, Six Sigma) and are visible at high

school and community college activities related to science

fairs, math competitions, and the Entrepreneurship in Engineering Club. Community support is evaluated for improvements yearly and resulted in a 2017 focus on helping hurricane

victims and the Red Cross.
7

Category 2: Strategy

2.1 Strategy Development

2.1a Strategy Development Process

2.1a(1) Figure 2.1-1 shows the key process steps in GG’s

Strategic Planning Process (SPP).

Yearly, SP Team members participate in a strategic and action

planning retreat to develop short- (one-year) and long-term

(three–five year) SOs, with corollary lag measures. SP Team

members prioritize change initiatives, identified as APs, by

using the nine-square prioritization tool to reach a group decision. They address transformational change by integrating SOs

and corollary (initiatives) APs within departmental projects,

deployed through Learning Communities, to ensure integrated

work along the value stream. The SP Team ensures agility and

flexibility by using our systematic decision-making process,

which ensures our capacity for rapid change: (1) gather the

data and information needed to make the decision, (2) analyze

for red flags, (3) look for research and learning, (4) complete

a Stakeholder Analysis to decide who needs to be involved in

making the decision, (5) decide on the success criteria to assess

the decision and learn from blind spots, and (6) deploy the

change. Deployment is ensured through our Leadership and

Communication Systems—for decisions, change, and strategy

(see Figures 1.1-1 and 1.1-2). Accountability is ensured with

systematic progress reviews by SO champions and AP owners.

A cycle of improvement included the 2016 plant-wide training

in the 13 core principles of Lean Decision Making.

2.1a(2) The SP Team systematically analyzes innovative

work product/process changes based on four indicators:

(1) manufacturing capability and capacity, (2) potential success

within three years, (3) workforce capability and capacity, and

(4) profit margin. Using business intelligence and predictive

analytics processes, the SP Team assesses the likelihood and

impact risk for key strategic opportunities, gathered from the

SOAR analysis (Figure 2.1-2), and decides the pace of the

7

Category 2: Strategy

a Stakeholder Analysis to decide who needs to be involved in 

making the decision, (5) decide on the success criteria to assess 

the decision and learn from blind spots, and (6) deploy the 

change. Deployment is ensured through our Leadership and 

Communication Systems—for decisions, change, and strategy 

(see Figures 1.1-1 and 1.1-2). Accountability is ensured with 

systematic progress reviews by SO champions and AP owners. 

A cycle of improvement included the 2016 plant-wide training 

in the 13 core principles of Lean Decision Making. 

2.1a(2) The SP Team systematically analyzes innovative 

work product/process changes based on four indicators: 

(1) manufacturing capability and capacity, (2) potential success 

within three years, (3) workforce capability and capacity, and 

(4) profit margin. Using business intelligence and predictive 

analytics processes, the SP Team assesses the likelihood and 

impact risk for key strategic opportunities, gathered from the 

SOAR analysis (Figure 2.1-2), and decides the pace of the 

Figure 2.1-1: Strategic Planning Process 

Timeline Parties

Strategic Planning

1.1	 Affirm MVV and CCs. Dec. SP Team: SLT, Directors,

Representatives from each Learning

Community, Gateway BOD Rep.,

Dealer Rep., Supplier Rep.,

Partner Rep., Key Associate Award

Recipients (current year)

1.2	 Review and analyze (1) key data (leadership and governance results, customer feedback,

workforce feedback, operational results) and (2) environmental scan (demographic trends,

economic and financial environment, constituent needs, innovation metrics).

Dec.

1.3	 Conduct	a	SOAR analysis. Dec.

1.4	 Identify strategic advantages and challenges, and new CCs. Dec.

1.5	 Affirm, modify, or add goals and SOs. Dec.

1.6	 Develop new SOs to address strategic challenges and leverage strategic advantages

and CCs, and to address transformational change and organizational agility.

Dec.

1.7	 Prioritize objectives; set metrics based on industry benchmarks and comparisons;

and assign SLT champions.

Dec.–Jan.

1.8	 Identify SO corollary APs, AP owners, Action Plan Teams, flywheels, priorities, and

leading measures.

Jan.–Feb.

1.9	 Prepare annual budget and income and expense projections, and approve capacity

analysis to assess our ability to execute on strategy. Plan HR training calendar and identify

training to be added to the yearly matrix.

Mar.–Apr. SLT

1.10	 Approve Strategic Plan. Jun. SLT

Action Planning

2.1	 Champions meet with Action Plan Teams; implementation begins. Jun.–Jul. Directors

2.2	 Roll-up AP tactics and add training to the matrix. Jun.–Jul. Directors

2.3	 Update the status of APs and measures monthly on network file. Jun.–Jul. Directors

2.4	 Review APs and metrics monthly; make adjustments as needed. Jun.–Jul. Directors

2.5	 Modify APs, if needed. Jun.–Jul. Directors

Step 3

3.1	 Evaluate prior year SP and APs, and makes modifications to the following-year SPP. Jul.–Nov. SLT

2.1 Strategy Development

2.1a Strategy Development Process

2.1a(1) Figure 2.1-1 shows the key process steps in GG’s 

Strategic Planning Process (SPP). 

Yearly, SP Team members participate in a strategic and action 

planning retreat to develop short- (one-year) and long-term 

(three–five year) SOs, with corollary lag measures. SP Team 

members prioritize change initiatives, identified as APs, by 

using the nine-square prioritization tool to reach a group decision. They address transformational change by integrating SOs 

and corollary (initiatives) APs within departmental projects, 

deployed through Learning Communities, to ensure integrated 

work along the value stream. The SP Team ensures agility and 

flexibility by using our systematic decision-making process, 

which ensures our capacity for rapid change: (1) gather the 

data and information needed to make the decision, (2) analyze 

for red flags, (3) look for research and learning, (4) complete 
8

prospective	innovations.	This	analysis	and	risk	assessment	of	

product	or	process	innovation	performance	clarifies	strategic	

opportunities	that	are	used	to	define	potential	SOs	aligned	to	

our	goals.

2.1a(3) During	step	1.2	of	the	SPP,	subject-matter	experts	

(SMEs)	present	data	and	analysis	based	on	statistical	analysis	

(descriptive,	inferential,	and	predictive)	using	the	following	

process	steps:	(1)	Conduct	a	comprehensive	analysis	of	

mission-based	results,	CC	success,	and	blind	spots	occurring;	

(2)	segment	the	market	for	current	and	prospective	products	

to	identify	strategy	focused	on	high-volume	potential	and	

financial	return;	(3)	complete	a	SOAR	(Strengths,	Opportunities,	Aspirations,	and	Results)	analysis	on	all	departments	to	

identify	potential	changes	in	the	environment	that	culminate	

in	our	strategic	challenges	and	advantages;	(4)	analyze	key	

success	factors	for	reliable	delivery,	reduced	cost–Lean	operations,	strategic	use	of	associates,	and	responses	to	customer	

needs	and	wants;	and	(5)	evaluate	the	VSM/department	

strategy	execution	success	of	SQDCPME.

The	SLT	evaluates	the	ability	to	execute	on	the	SP	during	the	

approval	phase	of	the	resources	(both	financial	and	human)	in	

step	1.9	of	the	SPP.	AP	owners	conduct	formal	and	informal	

evaluation	and	analysis	of	key	metrics	at	quarterly	intervals	

throughout	the	year	as	an	early	warning	system	for	GG.	This	

ensures	that	the	SLT	keeps	the	SP	on	track	and	that	it	delivers	

consistent	and	predictable	results.	

2.1a(4) GG	uses	run	the	business	(RTB)	and	change	the	

business	(CTB)	to	organize	the	respective	work	processes	in	a	

clear	and	concise	way.		Since	product	design,	sales,	and	marketing	are	Gateway’s	responsibility,	GG	is	primarily	focused	

internally.	To	decide	which	key	processes	are	accomplished	

by	whom,	the	SLT	uses	a	weighted	analysis	based	on	three	

scored	components:	(1)	CC	alignment,	(2)	CTB	measures,	

and	(3)	RTB	measures.	Yearly,	the	SLT	reviews	the	weighted	

analysis	to	decide/confirm	the	best	fit	of	either	internal	or	

external	suppliers/partners	for	accomplishing	our	key	work	

processes.	Based	on	strategy	considerations	and	innovation	as	

described	above,	the	SLT	determines	future	core	competencies	and	work	systems	to	achieve	long-term	strategy,	and	it	

initiates	a	corollary	AP.	The	SP	Team	uses	critical	thinking	by	

analyzing	and	synthesizing	key	data	and	information	to	make	

decisions concerning which work systems accomplish SOs and

map each SO to SQDCPME.

2.1b Strategic Objectives

2.1b(1) See Figure 2.1-3 for a subset of SOs and goals. The

full table is available on-site (AOS).

2.1b(2) GG allocates strategic business resources (financial

and HR) to SOs that balance short-term business performance

to sustain improvement toward its long-term objectives. SOs

contain one of two objectives: (1) CTB is to achieve the vision,

and (2) RTB is to achieve our current strategy—the daily

management system that translates the SOs into the work that

must be accomplished to fulfill our mission. See Figure 4.1-3

for RTB BSC measures.

GG uses the Catchball Process, based on a 2016 cycle of

improvement, to deploy SOs from top leadership to the factory

floor and “value-add” to the SP based on data analysis and

expertise. The Catchball Process clarifies objectives and is

used to check for understanding throughout GG. Catchball

ensures alignment between activities and objectives. For

example, Learning Communities Teams decided that total 

productive maintenance, process improvements, and success

through people were critical to quality (CTQ). Catchball

ensures continuous communication to develop clear KPIs with

all involved stakeholder groups, including associates, suppliers, partners, and customers.

Figure 2.1-4 shows Strategic Policy Deployment, which is

a critical element that requires continuous communication

to develop clear KPIs with all involved stakeholder groups,

including associates, suppliers, partners, and customers.

2.2 Strategy Implementation

2.2a(1),(2) APs are developed using the steps outlined in

2.1–2.4. APs are shown in Figure 2.1-3. During the SPP

step 1.8, the SP Team identifies AP(s) for each SO; assigns

an owner and leading measures; balances new, developing, or

sustained APs using the flywheel momentum; prioritizes APs

using the quality tool-light voting; and uses the Stakeholder

Analysis to ensure a diverse Action Plan Team, including

suppliers and partners, as appropriate.
9

SO champions schedule a preliminary meeting with AP owners

and team members to review the AP Process and reporting

rhythm. All Action Plan Teams use a standardized Action Plan

Reporting Tool, which contains information on deliverables,

lead metrics, resources required (human and financial),

training needed, and monthly updates. Action Plan Teams meet

(minimum) monthly to complete their AP deliverables, review

progress, and monitor metrics. Monthly, AP owners meet with

their SO champion to provide a progress update and remove

barriers. Quarterly, champions review AP scorecards in SLT

meetings. AP owners provide the SLT with evidence of Lean

methodologies, DMAIC, or TOC for any APs in the yellow or
10

red. When teams achieve APs, owners monitor metrics through

the end of the year; then they put the metrics in a review

scorecard to ensure sustainability. Based on the criticality of

the AP, the SLT may require a weekly, monthly, quarterly, or

yearly review for sustainment.

2.2a(3) Action Plan Teams submit a resource packet, which

requests financial support for AP deliverables, training, and

HR capability and capacity needs. Each team member delineates the amount of time, skills needed, and activities that he/

she would contribute. AP owners submit all resource requests

to the SLT for approval to ensure capability and capacity to

implement; requests include the financial commitment. Using

the priority ranking, flywheel momentum, business intelligence, and predictive analytics processes, the SLT assesses

the financial viability risk for APs and decides “go” or “no go”

on the action.

2.2a(4) The HR Manager develops a training calendar in

SPP step 1.9 based on SOs and APs. Utilizing the Training

Matrix Process (see 5.1a[1]), HR associates develop the scope

and sequence, timing, and cost of the Training Matrix to

address impacts such as cross-training (capacity) or new KSAs

(capability), as well as certifications and work instruction

updates. The training calendar is developed using five steps:

Step 1: Inventory critical and required training; Step 2: Create

a learning strategy of who needs what; Step 3: Create the content strategy of how the training will be delivered and the cost;

Step 4: Set goals and measure return on investment (ROI); and

Step 5: Yearly, use PDR to review for improvements, adjust,

and begin again.

2.2a(5) The SLT uses leading measures to track achievement

and effectiveness of APs because they are predictive and

influence meeting the SO lag measures. GG views AP metrics

as cause/effect: daily, weekly, and monthly leading measures

affect achievement of the yearly lag measures and ensure

success. SLT members ensure alignment due to systematic

monitoring of processes and line of sight from APs to SOs to

organizational goals using cascading scorecards.

2.2a(6) GG uses comparative and/or competitive data, when

available, to calculate a predictive future performance value.

AP leads work with the Quality Department to complete a

step-by-step Performance Projection Worksheet (PPW) to

forecast linear projections. AP leads address gaps in performance by adding deliverable tactics in the AP or through the

application of Lean methodologies, DMAIC, or TOC on the

process. The PPW also addresses benchmarking processes

and performance metrics to industry bests and best practices

from outside the sector. The Quality Department identifies

best-practice manufacturers in the industry or where similar

processes exist and provides the comparisons for the Action

Plan Team. This information allows the team to integrate plans

on how to adapt or implement a best practice as a step in the

AP and measure the effect on performance.

2.2b Action Plan Modification

The SP Team prioritizes the SOs and APs to enable the SLT to

put an AP on immediate hold to rapidly execute a new plan.

Since the SLT frequently reviews APs and metrics, members

are able to implement modified APs immediately after

completing the Risk Management Process. The AP Process

has been through multiple cycles of improvement using PDR.

Learning resulted in changes: 2015 linking AP owners to SO

champions, 2016 using an electronic AP form (paperless), and

2017 addressing AP gaps using TOC, if applicable.
11

Category 3: Customers

3.1 Voice of the Customer 

3.1a Customer Listening

3.1a(1) GG listens and interacts with customers using the

multiple two-way communication mechanisms listed in Figure

1.1-2. We observe dealers to obtain actionable information

during Action Plan Team meetings. For example, an AP owner

working on a self-driving mower obtained information on new

technology. Figure 3.1-1 shows how listening methods vary by

market segments and customer groups (see additional listening

methods in Figure 1.1-2).

Dealers and end-users use the GATE portal to communicate

customer issues, complaints, concerns, and accolades concerning our products. The SLT uses GATE information to obtain,

investigate, and answer dealer complaints related to quality

problems.

Listening methods vary across the customer life cycle (see

Figure 3.1-2).

The dealer feedback focus is on the quality of products,

customer support, and transactions. For example, listening

and learning from our dealers have resulted in hydraulic lever

indicator and tire quality improvements, among others.

3.1a(2) Gateway uses the product blueprint and national

account processes to listen to former and potential customers,

as well as customers of competitors.

3.1b Determination of Customer Satisfaction

and Engagement

3.1b(1) GG determines dealer satisfaction and engagement

primarily through the integration of information gained from

Dealer Councils, Dealer Roundtables, the dealer hotline, and

surveys. Methods differ among dealers, end-users, and market

segments (see Figure 3.1-1). Dissatisfaction is measured

primarily through hotline calls. Senior leaders have one-onone relationships with dealers who represent major accounts.

All results flow into the GG Data Warehouse, which is used

to capture information and enables analysis, as discussed in

4.1a(3).

This robust analysis makes the data actionable for use in our

AP Process and performance improvement methodology to

exceed customers’ expectations and secure long-term engagement. For example, the net promoter score (NPS), a summative

measure of customer engagement, provides information on

“How likely is it that you would recommend Gateway to a

friend or colleague?”

3.1b(2) GG obtains information on customer satisfaction

relative to satisfaction with competitors and other organizations providing similar products and services through the

use of third-party surveys. Industry benchmarks are obtained

from participation in the Outdoor Power Equipment Institute

(OPEI), supplier/partner feedback, sister divisions (Blue,

Yellow, Orange), Baldrige Award recipients/ASQ, and journals

such as Industry Week for continuous learning.
12

3.2 Customer Engagement

3.2a Product Offerings and Customer Support

3.2a(1) The determination of GG’s product offerings is the

responsibility of corporate marketing led by Gateway’s VP of

Sales/Marketing.

GG determines customer requirements for product offerings by

following the blueprint provided by corporate, which includes

voice-of-the-customer (VOC) and market data, as well as

information that is selected using customer needs and requirements to ensure effective use.

Gateway identifies and GG adapts product offerings to enter

new markets using the Product Offerings Process. GG sends

an official notice to suppliers involved with a new product

offering, who have been vetted thought the Supplier Selection Process (see category 6), about when a meeting will be

held to introduce the product offerings kick-off package. At

this meeting, GG reviews its expectations for the upcoming

product offerings. Once the meeting has been held, the kick-off

package is sent out via email to all potential suppliers.

The potential product offerings supplier receives the kick-off

package and forwards it to related departments. After it has

been sent out via email, the product offerings supplier will then

store it on the GATE portal, where it is visible for reference.

The product offerings supplier will go through the kick-off

package and separately store the start-up plans on the network.

All product offerings suppliers will be notified by email

when the start-up plan has been posted and whenever there is

an update.

The product offerings contact is responsible for all documentation required by GG. The product offerings contact is

responsible for receiving documentation and distributing it to

the required department for completion of appropriate forms.

When all trials have been run and all product offerings

documentation has complied with form, fit, and function, the

product offerings supplier will receive a product-offerings-tomass-production transfer letter. The product offerings supplier

will sign off for the completion of product offerings trials and

then forward all documentation to the Production Control Unit

and the Production Quality Unit for sign-off and the start-up

of mass production. When the letter has been signed by both

units, the product offerings supplier will send it back to the

product offerings purchasing buyer, stating that GG is ready

for mass production. The purchasing buyer creates a Specification Analysis Form for Product Offerings Reports as required

by Gateway.

3.2a(2) GG’s goal of customer support is to make our organization easy to do business with and responsive to customers’

needs and expectations. This is accomplished through a

variety of key listening methods and processes, as shown in

Figure 3.1-1. These methods enable our customers to seek

information and support, and conduct business, and enable us

to determine customer key support requirements. We deploy

customer key support requirements to all people and processes

involved in customer support through training, audits, KPIs,

and meetings. Information is deployed throughout our learning

community for continuous improvement (Figure 3.2-1; Voice

of the Customer Chart). GG builds and manages organizational

knowledge in order to improve customer results (see Figures

7.2-3 through 7.2-5, which show improving results from 2013

to 2017).

Our key means of customer support include (1) face-to-face

interactions, (2) telephone conversations, (3) email, (4) identified designated contacts, (5) Dealer Roundtables, (6) the dealer

hotline, and (7) Dealer Councils. The end-user customer can

use the 24/7 emergency contact numbers (dealer hotline) or

any of the multiple communication methods (see Figures 1.1-2

and 3.1-1). Quarterly letters are mailed to the customer to

update contact numbers.

3.2a(3) Our parent corporation, Gateway, determines our

customer groups and market segments based on our capacity

and capability to produce to OPEI specifications.

3.2b Customer Relationships

3.2b(1) We manage dealer interactions through our Contact

Management System and dealer tours. Each year, we sponsor Dealer Roundtables to highlight actions being taken at

Gateway corporate and at the GG plant level to ensure that

the dealers are satisfied with not only the products themselves

but also with the organization’s responsiveness. The top 20

Gateway dealers (identified by corporate) represent not only

major corporate accounts but also small independent customers. During roundtables, senior leaders and associates hear

dealers’ feedback, as well as that of the corporate customersupport organizations in both design and service engineering.

In addition to the roundtables, monthly calls are conducted

via WebEx so that all Dealer Managers can call in and discuss

problems they are seeing.

We use the product blueprint and national account processes

to listen to former and potential customers, as well as customers of competitors who can provide specific feedback on the

benefits or drawbacks of using our products. The Q Survey is

a web-based survey platform that integrates with a third-party,

sellingabcz.com, to poll current customers, potential customers, and customers of our competition. Representative surveys

also may elicit information about lost sales or overall customer

satisfaction.
13

Our Regional Sales Managers understand which potential

customers in their areas are working with competitors. Periodically, our Sales Managers will call on these customers to see

if they remain satisfied with the quality and support that they

have been receiving from our competition. When appropriate,

we will have a conversation to ascertain whether there is

anything we can do to win new or repeat business. We manage

customer interaction through sellingabcz.com. This allows us

to align our Sales and Service Teams around business objectives, with real-time coaching and one-on-one feedback.

While it is sometimes difficult to procure information regarding the satisfaction of our competition’s customers, we make it

a point to benchmark our competitors and comparable organizations on a regular basis. We use the opportunity to glean

best practices and compare capability of service processes. The

Contact Management System, which has revolutionized the

way we process hotline calls, was designed as a result of gaining understanding about this methodology as a best practice.

3.2b(2) Regional Sales Managers or National Account

Managers handle customer issues with deliveries and dayto-day orders; dealer/customers also can handle the customer

complaints of end-users, while senior leaders handle large

accounts. We manage our customer complaints regarding

product quality through GATE. The dealers work daily with

customer locations to resolve technical issues. If there is an

end-user issue that the dealer cannot resolve using its own

knowledge or the information stored in its GATE portal, it

can contact GG through the Contact Management System to

receive support and direction. This system has a repository

of customer issues organized by serial number so that we can

analyze the root cause of the problem and implement corrective actions. We use this information to make improvements

with our processes for customer support.

Overall warranty data for GG’s products have improved

through 2013. Warranty is measured as the percentage of

overall sales dollars for units sold within the last 16 months.

Warranty data are analyzed monthly, with parts and systems

identified to drive improvement, based on a close relationship

with the dealer/customers telling us “what went wrong.”

Monthly WebEx calls occur between corporate and GG’s

design engineers, and among supplier quality, manufacturing quality, and customer service personnel to identify LSS

improvement projects and to update root cause analysis and

APs to drive improvement for those identified systems.
1414

Figure 3.2-2: Customer Complaint Management System

Customers

Outside 

Processors /

Warehouses

Quality and 

Environmental System

Complaint Initiated

Engineer 

Addresses

Complaint

GG Provides 

Requested 

Information

Log/Categorize

Analyze for 

Root Cause

Corrective

Action

Confirm Closure 

with Customer, 

Prevent 

Recurrence

Implement 

Improvements 

Including Suppliers

Yes

No

1

Is 

Complaint 

Understood?

2

3

4

5

6

7

Continuous

Improvement
15

Category 4: Measurement, Analysis, and Knowledge Management

4.1 Measurement, Analysis, and 

Improvement of Organizational Performance

4.1a Performance Measurement

4.1a(1) Data and information for tracking daily operations

and overall organizational performance, including progress

on achieving SOs and APs, are selected, collected, aligned,

and integrated according to the Performance Measurement

System (PMES) shown in Figure 4.1-1. The system provides

integration with the SPP (Figure 2.1-1) and the Performance

Improvement System (see Figure P.2-4). The basic decisions

for measurement selection are shown in Figure 4.1-2. The
16

key organizational performance measures are given in the

Balanced Scorecard Measures (Figure 4.1-3), which are

segmented by SQDCPME, with result reference and frequency

of review.

4.1a(2) We select comparative data and information to support fact-based decision making (see Figure 4.1-4) to ensure

the actionability and cost-effectiveness of potential solutions to

address organizational and departmental needs.

4.1a(3) VOC and market data and information are selected

using customer needs and requirements determined in 3.2a(1)

to ensure effective use. The VOC data and information are

integrated through the SPP and Work Process Management

Process, with opportunities for improvement through the

Performance Improvement System. A cycle of improvement

in 2015 was modifying the VOC Process to include weekly

reporting to all departments.

The	Quality	Department	analyzes	complaints	for	monthly	

trends	to	seek	out	opportunities	for	improvement.	Department	

associates	also	monitor	social	media	data	and	information	

to	provide	positive	feedback	to	other	associates	and	dealers	

or	to	address	a	concern.	Information	is	deployed	through	the	

“Meeting	Structures”	(see	Figures	1.1-1	and	4.2-3).

4.1a(4) GG’s	continual	focus	on	process	measures	ensures	

that	the	PMES	can	respond	to	rapid	or	unexpected	organizational	or	external	changes.	Decisions	to	modify	or	create	an	AP	

can	be	made	and	implemented	during	the	weekly	SLT	meeting,	

monthly	scorecard	or	dashboard	reviews,	or	daily	Data	Board	

reviews.	Agility	is	enhanced	by	some	reviews	that	include	all	

key	stakeholders	(see	Figure	1.1-2).
17

4.1b Performance Analysis and Review

We review our performance and capabilities according to the

deploying and integrating methods shown in Figure 4.1-5.

Operational (tactical) data are described as “Run-the-Business”

and strategic data as “Change-the-Business.”

4.1c Performance Improvement

4.1c(1) Analytical data from a variety of sources are obtained

as input for future performance projections. These sources

include market analysis (comparative and competitive), environmental scans of the political climate, anticipated regulatory
18

changes or requirements, historical trends of GG and Gateway

key measures, and any anticipated new core competencies.

This information is fed into the SPP and design concepts of

key work processes (see 6.1a[2]) to project future performance. The integration of the SPP and key work processes

ensures alignment with key APs. If a review of these projections reveals a discrepancy, then the issue is addressed by one

of the following methods: adjust AP scope, create a new AP,

provide a corrective action report, or initiate a LSS project.

4.1c(2) Continuous improvement and opportunities for innovation from performance reviews are accomplished using the

variety of methods described in Figure 4.1-5; see the row titled

“Decisions Made/Used.” These priorities and opportunities are

deployed by the methods described in Figure 4.2-3 (Examples

of Knowledge Management Mechanisms).

4.2 Information and Knowledge Management

4.2a Data and Information

4.2a(1) GG verifies and ensures the quality of organizational

data and information to ensure their accuracy and validity,

integrity, reliability, and currency according to the methods

given in Figure 4.2-1.

4.2a(2) GG ensures the availability of organizational data

and information in a user-friendly format and timely manner

to various users according to Figure 4.2-2. The IT systems

are ensured to be user-friendly through focus groups for new

system introductions and annual surveys to all users

for existing systems.

4.2b Organizational Knowledge

4.2b(1) GG builds and manages organizational

knowledge according to Figure 4.2-3. The mechanisms represent how knowledge management (KM)

input is collected and transferred, and the evaluation measures are used to blend and correlate data.

4.2b(2) We share best practices in our organization

according to the deployment and integration methods described in Figure 4.2-3. See the row titled

“Rapid Identifying and Sharing of Best Practices.”

4.2b(3) We embed learning in the way our organization operates by the deployment and integration

methods described in Figure 4.2-3. See column

titled “Embed Learning.”
19
20

Category 5: Workforce 

5.1 Workforce Environment

5.1a Workforce Capability and Capacity

5.1a(1) GG builds an effective and supportive work environment using the Performance Evaluation System (PES):

performance evaluation; learning and development; reward

and recognition; benefits; and focus on individual/team

metrics. Through this system, SLT members assess associate

capability and capacity when setting organizational direction,

provide a positive associate climate that contributes to our

high-performance environment, ensure associate and leader

development when performing to plans, and manage and

improve performance. The PES is deployed using a variety of

two-way communication methods.

Within PES, SLT members assess associate skills, competencies, and certifications using the yearly Training Matrix

Process, which produces a comprehensive GG Training

Matrix: (1) Department Directors and associates identify

critical skills needed for jobs, competency levels (novice,

proficient, accomplished, master), certifications for licensure,

and yearly training needs based on a review of associates’

performance evaluations, career aspirations, and job descriptions. This information is documented on the Training Matrix.

Each associate is individually listed in his/her department’s

Training Matrix. (2) Directors also document opportunities

for cross training, based on past performance and competency

levels. (3) Directors submit the matrix to HR as an input into

the plant-wide training calendar, which also contains identified

training needs from the strategic initiatives and APs. (4) SLT

members approve the yearly training calendar’s financial and

associate time commitment.

Directors validate associate capacity yearly during the PES

by matching time studies to job descriptions and work flow.

After SLT members approve changes in capacity, job descriptions are revised by HR associates, the Work Assessment–Job

Profile is initiated, training is added to the associate’s matrix,

and the associate is audited by the HR Department to ensure

that critical skills are demonstrated. The Work Assessment–

Job Profile is conducted by Hardiness and Edger Community

College job profilers who have been trained and authorized

by industrial/organizational psychologists. The profiling

procedures are designed to systematically develop accurate

profiles through a task analysis that is used to select the tasks

most important to a job. In addition, a skills analysis is used

to identify the on-the-job behaviors associated with the skills

under consideration and to identify the skill levels necessary

for entry and effective performance on the job (i.e., cut or

passing scores).

Manpower planning is GG’s yearly process of creating an

efficient process using the correct staffing levels based on

key work and support process metrics. Manpower planning,
21

conducted by HR associates, encompasses different elements

of staffing levels that include an overtime plan, manpower

actuals, manpower work process evaluations, and manpower

efficiency control.

The PES process has seen several revisions; for example, in

2015 revisions included the addition of Work Assessment–

Job Profile, in 2016 the inclusion of manpower efficiency

control, and in 2017 the addition of the “accomplished” level.

5.1a(2) The HR Department and directors collaborate to

recruit, hire, place, and retain workforce members. The Hiring

Process includes the following steps:

1.1	 An approved position requisition is received by HR.

1.2	 HR associates review current résumés and/or applications received from advertising vacancies online or in

print media and maintaining accurate records of sourcing

and results. They forward résumés to the Department

Director and selected members of the department for

their review.

1.3	 A recruitment agency and classified advertisements may

be utilized depending on the current status of résumés/

the application pool.

1.4	 Potential candidates are selected by the Department

Director.

1.5	 HR staff administers the Work Assessment–Job Profile to

potential candidates.

1.6	 Qualified applicants who achieve required assessment

levels for the position are scheduled for interviews by

HR associates.

1.7	 The hiring director, selected members of the department,

and HR representative conduct interviews and select the

final candidate.

1.8	 The final candidate is screened with behavioral-based

questions to ensure a fit with our culture and to verify

qualifications.

1.9	 Upon obtaining successful screening results of the

final candidate, HR associates make a job offer to the

applicant. The offer is contingent on successful drugscreening results.

1.10	 Upon acceptance of the job offer, GG determines a start

date, and new-hire orientation is scheduled.

1.11	 The associate is placed in the position with an assigned

mentor and scheduled for 30-, 60-, and 90-day reviews.

1.12	 Associates are retained through GG’s meeting their

satisfaction and engagement requirements.

GG views diversity as something more than a moral imperative or a business necessity—we see it as a business opportunity. Our Diversity Strategy includes a variety of approaches.

SLT members network with community connections (e.g.,

churches, cultural institutions, colleges, the Urban League,

and the National Council of La Raza) to leverage minority

recruitment agencies. HR associates solicit referrals from other

GG associates since they will have peers in the industry or

know qualified candidates who may be looking for work. HR

leverages the Federal U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (EEOC) guidelines to ensure our hiring practice

is neutral to age, race, gender, and minority factors. The GG

Diversity Committee helps implement policy and comes up

with new ideas on how to attract more diverse candidates

to GG. If a recruitment agency is being used, HR associates

make the job more compelling to the agency by emphasizing

diversity-sensitive details (e.g., color, gender, generation,

education, skill characteristics, and language) that attract a

more diverse candidate pool when describing what makes

GG a good place to work. Improvements for these diversity

approaches have been through several revisions: revisions

include in 2015 the participation of GG directors on key

community church boards, the 2016 formation of the Diversity

Committee, and the 2017 addition of the 90-day review for

new associates.

5.1a(3) The workforce is prepared for changing capability

and capacity needs through systematic assessment of associate KSAs to engage in the work and manpower planning to

accomplish our work and support processes. GG manages

workforce career paths, leadership development, and succession planning to prepare for changes in organizational structure

and work systems, and builds concepts of change leadership

and adapting to change with training, coaching, and practice.

GG also systematically manages increasing staffing levels

(1) with cross training to prepare for and manage any periods

of workforce growth and (2) with the temporary workforce to

ensure continuity, prevent workforce reductions, and minimize

the impact of such reductions. A 2016 cycle of learning began

the associate implementation of yearly capability and capacity

analysis where associates break down their work into key

segments of time spent and the required KSA. Validated by

directors, this analysis ensures preparation to fill positions for

varying demand levels because of associate ability to fill a

one-up or one-down position in the value stream.

GG prepares for and manages periods of workforce growth

by projecting operations for three months in advance and

creating the three-month staffing plan. We also utilize recruitment agencies to assist in periods of growth. GG manages

the workforce and its needs to ensure continuity and prevent

workforce reductions by providing cross training and development for key work processes. On the Training Matrix, the

Department Director notes “Primary” or “Secondary” associate

responsibility; there must be at least two primary associates or

one primary and one secondary associate for each job function.

The impact of workforce reductions is minimized by the use

of a temporary workforce. GG acknowledges that a portion of

its employment requirements may be met through the employment of a temporary workforce. Workforce reductions are

prevented by maintaining a contingent workforce to account

for capacity changes, reducing the temporary workforce, and

requesting non-paid time.

Recent improvements for change management approaches

include 2015 revisions for the training on change leadership,

the 2016 publication of change leadership concepts and
22

practices, and the 2017 addition of succession planning for

critical positions eligible for retirement.

5.1a(4) The GG workforce is organized and managed by

value streams (relationship building CC) that accomplish

key work and support processes as measured on SQDCPME

(guiding principles CC). Employee performance is also

managed using the PES and the Training Matrix. Associates

exceed performance expectations by applying LSS tools and

improvements, which are validated during routine audits and

daily, weekly, and monthly meetings to share ideas, spread best

practices, and resolve issues based on data analysis. All KPIs

are aligned to SQDCPME to reinforce a customer, operational,

and/or performance focus. KPIs are discussed during these

meetings and improved in Learning Communities.

5.1b Workforce Climate

5.1b(1) GG ensures workplace health

by providing health assessments, flu

vaccinations, health screenings, coaching

for wellness, and Wellness Committee

activities. GG ensures workplace security

through automated security devices for

doors and gates that require unique codes or

GG-issued entry badges, security monitoring systems, surveillance systems, and

promptly removed access for terminated

associates. Electronic accessibility to the GG network is

provided by IT staff members, who assign each employee a

unique login, with password changes required quarterly. In

addition, associates who need remote access to GG servers

and files are provided access by the IT Department. The GG

facility also has only one point of common public access to

ensure workplace security. GG ensures workplace accessibility by ensuring that the facility is handicapped-accessible by

meeting the International ISO Accessibility Standards, added

in the 2016 cycle of improvement.

Performance measures and improvement goals for workplace

environmental factors are compliant with the OSHA 18001

Standard for Occupational Health and Safety. Results are

indicated in Figure 5.1-3, with additional results available

on-site.
23

5.1b(2) The diverse GG workforce is supported via services,

benefits, and policies that are tailored to workforce groups

and even cover family members; information on how to tailor

services and benefits to various workforce segments (see

Figure P.1-5) is often obtained through employee input from

the Wellness Committee. For example, policies tailored to the

workforce segment of plant/senior management include a car

allowance benefit, travel insurance, additional life insurance,

and long-term disability insurance. Vacation accruals are

tailored to the management segment based on tenure, insurance benefits apply to those with a status of full-time, and a

safety shoe reimbursement is tailored to associates. The GG

workforce is supported through services that include a reimbursable fitness center for associates and their guests (added

from a 2017 cycle of improvement), the Employee Assistance

Program (EAP), and the ability to participate in rewards for

health. The GG workforce is also supported through benefits

such as 401k plans; flexible spending accounts; medical,

dental, vision, and life insurance programs; and supplemental

insurance programs. The GG workforce is supported through

a variety of policies that cover cell phone use and allowances

that are tailored to meet different needs; uniforms provided and

laundered (2015 cycle of improvement), if requested; tuition

reimbursement; overtime (OT)/compensatory time; retirement

recognition and gifts; and lockers.

Employee services, benefits, and policies are communicated

to associates through the Employee Handbook, department

meetings, and the intranet.

5.2 Workforce Engagement

5.2a Workforce Engagement and Performance

5.2a(1) GG fosters an organizational culture characterized

by open communication through the SLT, which builds trust

through frank, two-way communication during Gemba walks,

participation on teams, and methods shown in Figure 1.1-2.

In addition, Learning Communities and teams formed around

continuous improvement activities ensure that communication

and collaboration benefit from the diverse ideas, cultures, and

thinking of associates as they brainstorm solutions to identified problems, decide on a workable solution, implement the

action, and evaluate the results. Furthermore, team formation

is conducted through a Stakeholder Analysis Process in order

to form diverse representation for beneficial sharing. The

Stakeholder Analysis Process begins with (1) identifying

those involved in the process or whose interests may be

affected; (2) rating involvement within the project, within the

organization, or with influencers; (3) documenting their needs;

(4) assessing stakeholder interest and influence; (5) managing

their expectations; and (6) gaining their support for the project.

This process benefits diverse thinking and ideas as evidenced

by our cross-functional problem-solving models (LSS,

Whiteboards, and “5 Whys,” etc.), innovation projects, quality

tools, idea generation, and value-stream mapping.

GG fosters an organization of high-performance work and

engagement through the Annual Review Process, with its

individual metrics and personalized growth plans; monitoring

of the Training Matrix; contributions to Learning Communities; and focus on SQDCPME. GG provides systematic

opportunities to empower and therefore engage associates. All

associates participate in training to ensure that they have all of

the tools needed to learn and grow, make their own decisions,

be leaders, and contribute to the success of the plant. In addition, they have the continuous improvement team structures to

connect with others throughout GG. Empowerment is the KPI

for the health and wellness of our associate strategy, which

includes learning and development, performance management,

succession planning, and career management. The Employee

Empowerment Questionnaire, developed by a third-party

supplier, is a valid tool for measuring empowerment, with

14 questionnaire items created as observable indicators of

empowerment. For example, 99% of our associates responded

strongly to “I have a lot of control over how I do my job,”

indicating empowerment in the respondent. Additional data are

available on-site. 2017 improvements are the addition of the

value “Respect Others” and the corollary personalized growth

opportunities, and the development of a future CC of value

engineering, which empowers associates to address their own

minor maintenance issues on the line.

5.2a(2),(3) GG determines the key drivers of workforce

engagement for different associate department segments

through the analytics of key formal and informal data. Data

come from surveys (satisfaction and engagement), training

effectiveness results, increased productivity, turnover, achievement of performance metrics (individual and department),

and career opportunities. For example, the Associate Survey

is segmented by department each year to obtain actionable

information. Based on a 2015 improvement, an additional

informal method used to assess engagement includes yearly
24

focus groups, with a standard set of key questions used

throughout the workforce segments. Responses are analyzed

and correlated with survey results to validate findings. Workforce engagement is also assessed and improved in the areas

of safety and productivity, and it is measured by absenteeism

rates, workforce retention, training hours, exit interviews, and

the number of days gone without a lost time claim. Measures

are shown in category 7.

5.2a(4) The PES supports high performance and workforce

engagement by (1) establishing goals for associates linked to

the SQDCPME, (2) managing and improving performance

through training and development, (3) rewarding associates as

discussed in 1.1b, and (4) demonstrating competence in our

organizational values.

GG redesigned its performance management processes in 2016

to better align with learning and development, encouraging

more active and meaningful discussions between associates

and directors about career development needs and interests.

Adding a correlation of GG’s strategic goals and objectives

on the Training Matrix helps associates align their personalized growth goals to GG’s objectives and see the connection

between their day-to-day efforts and our overall success.

High performers are eligible for the maximum pay-forperformance merit increase, based on performance in four

areas: (1) achievement of annual goals, (2) demonstration of

core values, (3) innovation and intelligent risk taking, and

(4) demonstration of a customer and business focus through

the achievement of APs and continuous improvement

activities.

A 2017 improvement, automating the Performance Management System (PMS) via technology, enables directors to have

more meaningful—and more frequent—discussions with their

direct reports; before 2017, performance management was

only an annual event. Integrated with learning and development, training can be assigned on the matrix to address skill

gaps identified during the review process, helping an associate

to improve his or her performance or acquire skills needed to

support new business initiatives or career aspirations.

5.2b Workforce and Leader Development

5.2b(1) The Learning and Development System supports

GG’s needs and the personal development of workforce

members, managers, and leaders by providing the structure

to assess the training needs of the workforce, provide learning opportunities, and improve the effectiveness of training.

See Figure 5.2-2.

To create an environment of workforce learning, senior leaders

participate in and provide funding for associate off-site and

in-house workforce training. Senior leaders have approved

career paths for system engineers. Individual training matrices

and a Training and Development Plan are deployed and used

throughout the plant.

Individual employee training needs are identified during the

yearly performance review and throughout the year, if needed.

Some training is self-identified, while other training is identified by directors. Associates’ tuition is paid through the Internal Training Program. Each department has a training budget

so that the training needs of associates can be individualized

and differentiated. Several associate segments (see Figure

P.1-5) are also required to meet certification requirements and

frequently participate in outside training (e.g., public safety).

GG provides a Tuition Reimbursement Program for qualified

educational expenses.

The Learning and Development System addresses GG’s core

competencies by including performance improvement training

annually in the training program; supports the achievement

of short- and long-term SOs and APs by reviewing them at

department meetings and incorporating them into the individual performance goals for associates; supports performance

improvement through the focus on individual goals aligned to

SQD; prepares for organizational change by identifying cross

training on the matrix; and supports innovation by recognizing

involvement in new ideas and taking risks. The Learning and

Development System supports ethics and ethical business

practices by incorporating an annual acknowledgement of

the ethics policy by associates and requiring yearly training

updates.

The Learning and Development System improves customer

focus in several ways. First, it is a core element of the training program. Second, customer focus is discussed at all

meetings where best practices, new ideas, and opportunities

for improvement are shared. Third, training is designed to

focus on SQDCPME, innovation, and LSS. The Learning and

Development System ensures the transfer of knowledge from

departing or retiring workforce members through succession

planning, use of career ladders, and cross training—either

within or across departments. To ensure process dependency

versus person dependency, GG uses ISO guidelines for work

instructions, training guides, and SIPOC-mapped processes;

they are all updated and improved yearly or in response to our

change management procedure. The Learning and Development System ensures the reinforcement of new knowledge

and skills on the job through mentoring, audits, retraining, and

coaching. A 2015 improvement resulted in the addition of the

Leave Behind, a formal process that documents what an associate assuming a new role would need to know to be successful

based on information provided by the departing associate.

5.2b(2) The effectiveness of the Learning and Development System is evaluated through the use of the Kirkpatrick

evaluation system. The efficiency of the Learning and
25

Development System is evaluated through improvements in

cycle time to train and then design new materials; a decrease

in the amount of time to effectively train on a subject area;

and evaluations and improvements in trainer presentations and

delivery of content. ROI in training is calculated as achievement of 

SQDCPME metrics in which P is aligned to workforce

engagement. Based on an analysis of results, improvements in

curriculum are made or new materials are developed for the

subsequent trainings.

5.2b(3) Career progression is managed for associates through

certification processes using work keys, career ladders, and

formal career paths. Formal career path programs outline

education and experience requirements to advance to the next

level. Career development for the GG workforce is planned

through the PMS and the setting of individualized goals to help

advance employee careers and develop associates for future

roles. Succession planning for management and leadership

positions is a systematic process that begins with a risk assessment of critical positions and potential retirements. A development plan for identified associates for promotion is generated

with opportunities to shadow, receive formalized training,

and participate in position-related tasks. Based on the 2016

cycle of improvement, a risk assessment with a mathematical

calculation was added.
26

Category 6: Operations

6.1 Work Processes

6.1a Product and Process Design

6.1a(1) GG determines key product and work process

requirements by placing emphasis on product attributes

(developed from feedback gained from dealers listening to

the VOC [see Figure 4.2-3] and the blueprint provided by

corporate that includes market data that leads to customer

satisfaction and preference). We use the Kano model, a 2015

improvement, as a framework to categorize and prioritize

the different performance features of our products based on

VOC. We map this input in a CTQ tree, a 2016 improvement,

to provide clarity and structure for developing quantifiable

process specifications. Design quality is the downstream driver

of quality, which includes concept-to-customer times, time for

design, development, production, and delivery of new mowers.

We focus on continuous improvement and corrective action as

far upstream as possible for the greatest savings and collaborate with the Corporate Design Team on every innovation and

new model.

6.1a(2) Our key work processes (Figure 6.1-2) are created

from SIPOCs (available on-site), so that all stakeholders

understand our core processes and their requirements. Figure

6.1-1 shows a SIPOC example.

6.1a(3) GG uses DMADV/DMAIC as a structured process

for developing products and work processes to ensure that

customer needs are met. We incorporate Lean tools and

methods for the particular product being developed and delivered. Step 1: Define: Identify new work processes based on

cross-functional team recommendations. The diversity of team

members ensures a working knowledge of the product and

processes throughout the plant. The Quality Department keeps

the DMADV/DMAIC process on track, evaluates progress

on each tollgate, and makes midcourse corrections based on

emerging technology; goals; and clear measures of quality,

quantity, cost, and time. Step 2: Measure: Analyze multiple

product/process indicators including VOC requirements and

indicators related to complaints. Step 3: Analyze: The Quality

Department confirms which changes and goals will provide the

optimal benefit for the product/process (culture of performance

excellence). Assessment of risk is analyzed from competitive,

salability, and value analyses. Step 4: Improve: The DMAIC

Team defines a set of activities used by associates for meeting process quality goals. This includes establishing process

capability in meeting customer needs and agility in reducing

cycle time. Step 5: Control: The Quality Department transfers

all aspects of production to operations after identifying controls needed, designing a feedback loop, optimizing associate

control, and scheduling audit plans to ensure continuous

improvement. The use of DMAIC resulted in the addition of

the paint flush box, which enables us to rapidly switch colors

and customize paint colors according to customers changing

requirements.

6.1b Process Management and Improvement

6.1b(1) Quality control processes are used to evaluate performance to goals. The Quality Department evaluates performance during operations and compares it to goals to verify that

control is being maintained. Performance is evaluated during

and after operations, with information provided on electronic

displays located throughout the plant, during Learning Communities meetings, during production meetings, and to the

SLT daily. Measures or indicators to control and improve work

processes are shown in Figure 6.1-2. This resulted in speed and

part accuracy in the kanban system and increased throughput.

6.1b(2) Key support processes are managed as a part of

business strategy. To deliver operational excellence and change

the business, key work and support processes are identified

and reaffirmed annually during the SPP when goals, SOs, and
27

APs are reviewed and the measures that track progress are

identified. For each measure or set of measures, key work

processes are identified as those that achieve those measures.

Key work processes add value to the customer or end-user,

and support processes support key processes. Champions and

targets are set for both key work and support processes during

the SPP. Measures or indicators to control and improve support

processes are shown in Figure 6.1-2. Day-to-day operation

of support processes ensures that they meet key requirements

(see Figure 6.1-3). HR monitors daily use of cross-trained

associates who move up or down the value stream to different

positions according to their training matrix.
28

6.1b(3) To ensure that our processes are effective and

efficient, key work and support processes are mapped using

SIPOC. The SIPOC starts with the definition of the process

and the corollary key process steps. The suppliers of each

input and the customers of each output are identified. This

ensures the connection of processes and the ability to Gemba

the value stream. To generate efficiencies, the process is

broken down into its constituent sub-processes, activities, and

tasks/steps to pinpoint potential improvements. This includes

identifying performance measures to monitor the effectiveness

of the process and track the impact of improvements, which

are monitored at all levels of the organization during regularly

scheduled production and Learning Communities meetings.

For example, one of the Learning Communities mapped a key

work process in fabrication and simplified the work instruction, which decreased errors made by new associates.

KPIs are our primary CTQ metrics captured in SQDCPME

metrics. Data are also shown on electronic displays at each

work process on the manufacturing floor. Process improvements begin with two-way associate collaboration and communication on white boards at each line during daily meetings.

To drive out waste, variability is reduced using Lean tools

(e.g., standard work, visual management), adherence to ISO

standards, and both scheduled and spot audits. For example,

poka-yoke principles applied at a work station (cell) prevent

blade decks from being assembled incorrectly. A bar code on

the part provides information about the operating resistance.

A simple test by the associate checks the actual resistance so

the part can move down the conveyor; otherwise it does not

pass through the toll gate. This improves quality.

Figure 6.1-4 gives an overview of the tools used to improve

products and processes. GG performs product audits at appropriate stages of production and delivery to verify conformity to

all specified requirements. Dock audits, a 2016 improvement,

are conducted at defined frequencies. This includes a visual

inspection and packaging and labeling verification. When

improvements are identified, counter measures are applied, and

the issue is entered into the GATE database for analysis by the

Quality Department and shared at production and Learning

Communities meetings. GG uses Six Sigma to reduce process

variation and enhance process control, and uses Lean to drive

out waste, promote work standardization, and increase flow.

TOC for bottlenecks, an improvement in 2015, is applied, as

appropriate.

The SLT and process owners monitor the work and support

processes to ensure their effectiveness and efficiency and to

share results during production meetings and with Learning

Communities. Stored in GATE, these results and approach

ensure deployment of the information throughout the plant.

GG uses line-of-site visual management to organize the

working area in a way that people (even outsiders) can tell

whether things are going well or are amiss without the help

of an expert. One of the biggest visual control innovations

is the “big room.” This is a very large room in which many

visual management tools are displayed and maintained for

each scorecard of SQDCPME. These tools include the status

of each item and can be reviewed by any of the associates,

suppliers, partners, or customers when they visit the plant or

through GATE access. Any deviation from the schedule or

performance targets is immediately visible, and root cause

analysis is discussed in Learning Communities meetings. This

system enables fast and accurate decision making, increases

productivity, reduces defects and mistakes, helps GG meet

deadlines, facilitates communication, improves safety, lowers

costs, and generally gives associates more control over their

environment, thus leading to the future CC of line associates as

first-in for a needed repair (value engineering).
29

6.1c Supply-Chain Management

GG views suppliers as partners in pursuit of mutual goals,

rather than as adversaries in a win-lose battle over price. The

basis for building our supplier relationship is cooperation,

collaboration, and trust. Purchasing at GG requires associates

skilled and committed to working with our dealers and suppliers in a collaborative problem-solving environment, facilitating quality and continuous improvement. After a vetting and

analysis of needed data requirements, we exchange data with

suppliers via the electronic GATE portal, which provides

electronic access to email, best practices, and two-way

communication, as well as HR, technical, financial, quality,

schedule, and customer satisfaction data (see 3.1a[1]).

Suppliers (Figure P.1-9) are selected using the Supplier Selection Process (Figure 6.1-5).

Supplier assessment comprises three separate but interrelated

assessments, undertaken by the cross-functional team that

hosts face-to-face pre- and post-conferences to share results.

These assessments ensure conformance to quality and performance standards and establish a baseline for the improvement

process. A yearly visit to the supplier site is required by the

Plant Manager and cross-functional team or by a third party

who will certify the quality system as acceptable.

The Plant Manager, in collaboration with the team, evaluates

supplier quality, delivery, and service. The Plant Manager

updates supplier scorecards on conformance to customer

requirements, process capability (Cpk), percentage of nonconforming products shipped, cycle times of key processes,

customer satisfaction, and the identified and measured cost

of poor quality. The Plant Manager also conducts supplier

meetings that gauge supplier performance against the MVV

and established goals. The addition of Cpk and cycle time

measures was a 2015 improvement. Scorecard results are

shared monthly with each supplier and with associates during

Learning Communities meetings. Metrics not at or above

targets result in the collaborative development of APs, which

must show a monthly improvement. From initial supplier

agreements to contract renegotiations, the Plant Manager

consistently communicates with suppliers. To mitigate risk,

it is critical that supplier scorecard information is shared

with stakeholders throughout the organization whose work

is impacted by supplier performance. By aligning supplier

scorecard metrics to goals and SOs, improving the evaluation processes, and communicating performance with both

suppliers and stakeholders, GG’s Plant Manager has greatly

improved supplier efficiency over the last three years.

6.1d Innovation Management

GG’s quality risk management (QRM) process supports

a scientific and practical approach to decisions related to

identifying which innovations are worth pursuing. Our QRM

is a systematic process for the assessment, control, communication, and review of risks for innovation and change.

Aligned to ISO 31000 Guidance on Risk Management, it

provides documented, transparent, and reproducible methods

to accomplish steps of the process based on current knowledge

about assessing the probability, severity, and, sometimes,

detectability of the risk. Figure 6.1-6 shows how the QRM

considers elements at a level of detail commensurate with the

specific risk.

Decision tollgates are not shown in Figure 6.1-6 because

decisions can occur at any point in the process. QRM activities

are undertaken by cross-functional teams. The output of a risk

assessment is either a quantitative estimate of risk or a qualitative description of a range of risk. The SLT communicates

the information about risk and risk management between the

decision makers and other stakeholders in 1:1 meetings. The

output/result of the QRM process shared during these meetings

concerns the probability, severity, acceptability, detectability,

or other aspects of risks associated with the innovation. For

example, vetted through this process was the 2015 strategic

opportunity, preventive maintenance, which was added to our

cascading metrics system as the M in SQDCPME. Risk was

also assessed before the addition of our welding robots.

Senior leaders create an environment for innovation through

Kaizen events, VSM, action planning, innovation projects, and

DMAIC projects where associates identify opportunities for

improvement and generate solutions. Senior leaders create an

environment for intelligent risk taking by integrating corollary
30

skills in training and development, recognizing efforts through

reward and recognition, and evaluating development on

the performance evaluations. Senior leaders evaluate and

prioritize all strategic initiatives using predefined criteria, as

previously discussed. For example, one Kaizen event focused

on improving overall flow through shipping and packaging.

Primary problems included inefficiently placed tools and

packaging suppliers, bottlenecks on the track for products, and

potential product damage during packaging operations (see

Figure 6.1-7 for an example of results).
31

6.2 Operational Effectiveness 

6.2a Process Efficiency and Effectiveness

GG controls the overall cost of operations through the integration of the Car Production System into the DMAIC methodology. Figure 6.2-1 depicts the tier structure of DMAIC.

6.2b Management of Information Systems

6.2b(1) Information protection processes and procedures

include security policies (that address purpose, scope, roles,

responsibilities, management commitment, and coordination

among organizational entities), processes, and procedures that

are used to manage the protection of information systems and

assets. The process steps follow: (1) baseline configuration

of IT/industrial control systems is created and maintained to

incorporate appropriate security principles (e.g., concept of

least functionality); (2) a system development life cycle to

manage systems is implemented; (3) configuration change

control processes are in place; (4) backups of information are

conducted, maintained, and tested periodically; (5) policy

and regulations regarding the physical operating environment

for organizational assets are met; (6) protection processes are

continuously improved; (7) the effectiveness of protection

technologies is shared with appropriate parties; (8) response

plans (Incident Response and Business Continuity) and

recovery plans (Incident Recovery and Disaster Recovery) are

in place, managed, and tested; (9) cybersecurity is included in

HR practices (e.g., personnel screening); and (10) a Vulnerability Management Plan is developed and implemented.

6.2b(2) Security, confidentiality, and appropriate access

of our information system are managed consistent with the

organization’s risk strategy to protect the confidentiality,

integrity, and availability of information. Improvements have

resulted in automating patch deployments, encrypting information, investing in data loss prevention software, and regularly

updating antispyware on all computers.

The Information Security Management System is compliant

with the ISO/IEC 27001 Standard for Information Security

Management. Data at rest and in transit are protected. Assets

are formally managed throughout removal, transfers, and

disposition. Adequate capacity to ensure availability is

maintained. Protections against data leaks are implemented.

Integrity checking mechanisms are used to verify hardware,

software, firmware, and information integrity. The development and testing environment(s) are separate from the production environment. The process follows:

Define: Our Risk Manager identifies and manages assets:

personnel, devices, systems, and facilities that enable GG to

achieve business relative to our SOs and risk strategy. The

Risk Manager inventories physical devices and systems within

the organization, as well as software platforms and applications. Resources (e.g., hardware, devices, data, time, and

software) are prioritized based on their classification, criticality, and business value. Cybersecurity roles and responsibilities

(new improvement in 2017) for the entire workforce and

third-party stakeholders (e.g., suppliers, customers, and
32

partners) are established. Resilience requirements to support

delivery of critical services are established for all operating

states (e.g., under duress/attack, during recovery, and during

normal operations).

Measure: Risk Assessment: GG measures the cybersecurity

risk for operations (including mission, functions, image, or

reputation), organizational assets, and individuals. Cyber threat

intelligence and vulnerability information are received from

information-sharing forums and sources. Threats, both internal

and external, are identified, measured, and documented. Risk

responses are identified and prioritized. This process identified SQL injection attacks as specific targets for our kind of

server; attackers use malicious code to get the server to divulge

information it normally wouldn’t.

Analyze: Risk Management Strategy: Analysis is conducted to

ensure adequate response and support recovery activities. GG’s

priorities, constraints, risk tolerances, and assumptions are

analyzed and used to support operational risk decisions. Riskmanagement processes are established, managed, and agreed

to by customers and stakeholders. GG’s determination of risk

tolerance is informed by its role in critical infrastructure and

sector-specific risk analysis. Therefore, GG is now protected

against cross-site scripting.

Improve: The seven-step Cybersecurity Process (Figure 6.2-3)

illustrates how GG uses the National Institute of Standards

and Technology’s (NIST’s) Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity (CSF). These steps will be

repeated to continuously improve our cybersecurity.

Improve Supply-Chain Risk Management: The Risk

Management Committee identifies, prioritizes, and assesses

suppliers of critical information systems, components, and

services using the NIST CSF. Suppliers are required by

contract to implement appropriate measures designed to meet

the objectives in the Cyber Supply–Chain Risk Management

Plan (2017 improvement). Suppliers are monitored to confirm

that they have satisfied their obligations as required. Reviews

of audits, summaries of test results, or other equivalent evaluations of suppliers/providers are conducted. Response and

recovery planning and testing are conducted with suppliers/

providers.

Control: Identity Management and Access Control:

Access to physical assets and associated facilities is limited

to authorized users, processes, and devices, and is managed

consistent with the assessed risk of unauthorized access.

Associates and partners are provided cybersecurity awareness

education and are adequately trained to perform their information security-related duties and responsibilities consistent with

related policies, procedures, and agreements.

6.2c Safety and Emergency Preparedness 

6.2c(1) GG is committed to providing a workplace that is

safe, healthy, and injury-free for all associates, as evidenced by

our Safety and Health Management System. All new associates

receive safety orientation and OSHA training, which covers

emergency plans, accident prevention, ergonomics, chemical

handling, material safety data sheets, personal protective

equipment, and machine safety. OSHA guidelines are followed

at all times and reinforced through the Job Hazard Analysis

Process, drug testing, training, newsletters, meetings, and

electronic monitors. GG meets all Customs Trade Partnership

against Terrorism (C-TPAT) requirements. GG also uses

electronic security monitoring, guards, and no-outsider access

without clearance. Any outside visitor must complete safety

training prior to entering the plant.
33

The Quality Department conducts daily internal audits/

inspections to ensure that safety standards are being followed.

The Quality Department also handles immediate recall of

products for safety concerns (see Figure 6.2-4).

The Quality Department communicates findings to the VSM

Manager and deploys findings through our meeting structure

(Figure 1.1-1). If there are findings, whether internal or external, a Safety Team is immediately dispatched to determine

root cause and implement corrective actions to prevent future

accidents. In addition, safety is on all associates’scorecards.

The Quality Department conducts regularly scheduled and

unscheduled emergency drills. To ensure recovery, all accidents require investigations led by the associate supervising

work process areas. Minor accidents require the completion

of the Report of Accident Form. Accidents resulting in losses

greater than $500 in materials and labor require an investigation and formal report based on the “5 Whys” procedure. The

Director and an associate lead the investigation and present the

report to the SLT.

6.2c(2) GG ensures that the organization is prepared for

disasters or emergencies through the development of a comprehensive Disaster and Emergency Plan, which is compliant with

the ISO 22301 Standard for Business Continuity Management.

The most likely potential disasters or emergencies include

winter weather events or emergencies associated with largescale events. GG’s Disaster and Emergency Plan considers
34

prevention through preplanning, documentation, training, and

practicing work instructions related to chemical handling and

storage, first aid, radiation safety, emergency communication

and evacuation, fire response, hot work, high winds emergency

response, electrical safety, personal protective equipment, and

scissor lift vehicles.

GG’s Disaster and Emergency Plan considers continuity of

operations through the following:

■	 Implementing procedures based on National Incident

Management System (NIMS) processes

■	 Providing staff members with training and ongoing communication during Learning Communities in step-by-step

guidance for emergency situations

■	 Ensuring the emergency availability of information

systems, as discussed in 6.2b(1)

GG’s Disaster and Emergency Preparedness System considers recovery by following the deactivation procedures in the

Emergency Operations Plan in accordance with NIMS. Also,

Finance Department staff members distribute standardized

forms for associates to record time and equipment usage for

large-scale events in case a Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA) disaster is declared to facilitate FEMA

reimbursements, if eligible.

GG uses its Disaster and Emergency Plan as a guide to rely

on the workforce, suppliers, and partners by building strong

relationships, collaborating on plan development, training continually and evaluating its effectiveness, drilling and repeating,

and integrating best practices in the Disaster and Emergency

Plan. For example, we learned from Hurricane Katrina that the

best form of communication is by text messaging or tweets.

Therefore, all associates, suppliers, and partners practice

emergency messaging yearly, a 2016 improvement.
35

Category 7: Results

7.1 Product and Process Results 

7.1a Customer-Focused Product and Service 

Results

As described in P.1b(2) and detailed in Figure P.1-8, our

customer groups are the commercial and household dealers.

Dealer order due dates are tracked to ensure adherences to ontime delivery, as shown in Figure 7.1-1 (RTB BSC–Delivery).

The relative size by volume of the dealer groups over time

illustrates a continual growth in all segments in Figure 7.1-2.

First-to-market product innovations are tallied by focus (key

product differentiators) in Figure 7.1-3. These innovations are

a means to address the key changes affecting our competitive

position given in P.2a(2).

Our key work processes are given in Key Processes, and

Measures or Indicators to Control and Improve Them (Figure

6.1-2). The value-stream is segmented into fabrication, paint,

and assembly, with their relative production-to-schedule

performance given in Figure 7.1-4 (RTB BSC–Delivery).

Our product offering is segmented into three types of units:

homestead, commercial, and putting greens, with relative

production volume given in Figure 7.1-5. The effectiveness

of our production to schedule, supply chain, maintenance

Comparison Gateway Division

Figure 7.1-1: On-Time Delivery to Dealers

100

98

96

94

92 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

On-Time Delivery 

of Complete Order (%)

Commercial Homeowner GG Overall

IW Best Plants

Figure 7.1-4: Production to Schedule

100

98

96

94

92 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Production to Schedule

(Roll-Up of Monthly, %)

Fabrication Paint Assembly Overall

Figure 7.1-5: Produced Units

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Produced Units (1,000)

Homestead Commercial Putting Greens
36

(reliability), and quality has allowed us by design to reduce our

finished inventory days (thereby favorably reducing cost), as

shown in Figure 7.1-6 (RTB BSC–Cost).

Product quality is segmented by type of unit in Figure 7.1-7

(RTB BSC–Quality), and segmented by value stream in Figure

7.1-8. Things Gone Wrong (TGW) per 100 units is a measure

of issues reaching the customer (RTB BSC–Quality; Figure

7.1-9). The effectiveness of quality methods is indicated by

a steady favorable reduction in corrective actions in Figure

7.1-10, and a transition from a reactive to more of a proactive

nature of the corrective actions, illustrating an increasingly

more mature system, is shown in Figure 7.1-11.

Figure 7.1-6: Finished Inventory (Days)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Finished Inventory (Days)

Homestead Commercial Putting Greens

Comparison Gateway Division

GG Overall

IW Best Plants

Figure 7.1-7: First-Time Quality by Product

100

98

96

94

92

90

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

First-Time Quality (%)

Homestead Commercial Putting Greens

Comparison Gateway Division

GG Overall

IW Best Plants

Figure 7.1-8: First-Time Quality by Value Stream

100

98

96

94

92

90

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

First-Time Quality (%)

Fabrication Paint Assembly GG Overall

Homestead Commercial Putting Greens

Figure 7.1-9: TGW per 100 Units

50

40

30

20

10

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

TGW per 100 Units

Comparison Gateway Division

GG Overall

Internal Supplier Non-Compliance

Figure 7.1-10: Quality: Corrective Actions by Type

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Corrective Actions

Customer Claim

Corrective % Preventive %

Figure 7.1-11: Quality: Corrective Action Maturity

65

60

55

50

45

40

35

30

Corrective Action Maturity (%)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

7.1b Work Process Effectiveness Results

7.1b(1) Our RCM approach is progressively moving toward

more of a predictive rather than a reactive (run to failure) outcome, as illustrated in Figure 7.1-12, which corresponds with

our strategic move towards transitioning to an operator-repair

style of operation (see Figures 7.4-8 and 7.4-9). Measures of

maintenance effectiveness are provided in Figures 7.1-13,

7.1-14a,b, and 7.1-15 (RTB BSC–Maintenance). Overall
37

Condition-Based Preventive Reactive Eliminated

Figure 7.1-12: Maintenance Strategy Maturity

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Maintenance Strategy

Maturity (%)

2012

Availability Performance Quality

OEE IW Best Plants

Figure 7.1-13: Overall Equipment Effectiveness

98

96

94

92

90

88

Equipment Effectiveness (%)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

85

84

83

82

81

80

79

OEE (%)

OEE Utilization TEEP

Figure 7.1-14b: Total Effective Equipment Performance

90

80

70

60

50

40

30 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total Effectice Equipment

Performance (TEEP = OEE/U, %)

60

55

50

45

40

35

30

TEEP (%)

Inherent Availability

(IA = MTBF/[MTBF + MTTR])

MTBF (hrs) MTTR (hrs)

Figure 7.1-15: Inherent Availability

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

Hours

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

93.5

93.0

92.5

92.0

91.5

91.0

90.5

 Inherent Availability (%)

equipment effectiveness (OEE) is relative to production scheduled time; whereas total effective equipment performance

(TEEP) is relative to calendar hours (all), which show potential

(future) capacity. Inherent availability is a measure of risk or

priority, with Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) being

the average of how frequently does a failure occur, and Mean

Time to Repair (MTTR) being the average of how long does it

take to fix the failure.

We demonstrate our CC of relationship building and being a

good citizen by recycling what is economically and technically feasible, as shown in Figures 7.1-16, 7.1-17, and 7.1-18.

Additionally, our emerging CC of value engineering is evident

in the Learning Communities and LSS project ROI, as well as

successful completion of our cybersecurity process in 2017, as

shown in Figures 7.1-19 and 7.1-20, respectively. The successful implementation of the Cybersecurity System following

the Baldrige Cybersecurity Excellence Builder guidelines is

demonstrating favorable performance as we address our SC3

and cybersecurity SO.

Figure 7.1-16: Percentage of Solid Waste Stream Recycled

100

99

98

97

96

95

94

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Recycle (%)

GG Recycle % Industry Benchmark %
38

Figure 7.1-17: Waste Pounds Per Unit

1.00

.75

.50

.25

0

Waste Pounds/Unit

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

 Tons to Landfill

Waste Pounds/Unit Tons to Landfill

Aluminum/Plastic

Figure 7.1-18: Key Recycling Trends (Tons)

200

150

100

50

0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Recycling Trends (Tons)

Scrap Metal Cardboard Wood

Paper Solvent & Oil

Figure 7.1-19: Learning Communities and LSS Projects ROI

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Savings ($1,000)

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

LSS Projects ROI ($1,000)

Savings Cumulative ROI

7.1b(2) Our systematic focus on quality processes

(SQDCPME) allows us to demonstrate our CC of guiding

principles, as shown by the number of major findings on our

certification audits, our associate participation in emergency

preparedness activities, and the performance of the leading

measures in our Safety System in Figures 7.1-21, 7.1-22, and

7.1-23, respectively.
39

7.1c Supply-Chain Management

Supply-chain management is a key to our success, with

the respective supplier/partner performance for quality and

on-time delivery shown in Figures 7.1-24 and 7.1-25. Their

favorable overall performance has allowed us to take the intelligent risk of reducing the SCM inventory (days), resulting in a

favorable reduction in cost, as illustrated in Figure 7.1-26. The

increase for 2017 was purposeful to support a step increase in

production, as shown in Figure 7.1-5. Additionally, the support

of Gateway and supplier/partner interfaces is demonstrated by

System Availability, as shown in Figure 7.1-27.

Earthmover

Objective

Figure 7.1-24: Supplier Quality Index

100

98

96

94

92

90

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Supplier Quality Index (%)

Cultivar Core

Furrows Solvent & Oil

Earthmover

Objective

Figure 7.1-25: Supplier On-Time Delivery 

100

99

98

97

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Supplier On-Time Delivery (%)

Cultivar Core

Furrows Diatomaceous Earth
40

Furrows (Power Train) Diatomaceous Earth (Electronics)

Overall (Weighted Average)

Figure 7.1-26: SCM Inventory (Days) 

25

20

15

10

5

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

SCM Inventory (Days)

Cultivar (Engines) Core (Tires)

IW Best Plants

GATE (Priority)

GG Composite

Figure 7.1-27: System Availability

100

99

98

97

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

System Availability (%)

ERP–Gateway GG–Business

Intranet PC & Software

7.2 Customer Results

7.2a Customer-Focused Results

7.2a(1) GGs current levels and trends in key measures or

indicators of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction are

shown below. Results for Warranty Cost per Unit (Figure 7.2.1

[RTB BSC–Cost]) show a steady level of GG maintaining cost

levels relative to the comparison Gateway division. Overall

warranty data for GG’s products have remained stable since

2013. Warranty cost includes the period until 18 months after

purchase. As complaints/concerns have slowly declined, there

has been a marked increase in compliments shared (Figure

7.2-2); these comments are shared throughout our organization

through the meeting structure.

IW Best Plants (Derived)

Figure 7.2-1: Warranty Cost per Unit

70

60

50

40

30 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Warranty Cost per Unit ($)

GG Warranty Cost/Unit Comparison Gateway Division

Compliments Shared Complaints/Concerns

Figure 7.2-2: Complaints vs. Compliments

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Number

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

GG shows how it builds and manages organizational knowledge in Figures 7.2-3 through 7.2-5. Overall complaints

resolved satisfactorily for GG’s products have improved since

2013 (Figure 7.2-3a, b). GG’s goal of customer support is to

make our organization easy to do business with and responsive

to customers’ needs and expectations; results for this goal have

improved from 2013 to 2017 (Figures 7.2-4 and 7.2-5). These

charts illustrate the measures for how knowledge management

(KM) input is collected and transferred, and how evaluation

measures blend and correlate actionable data.

Commercial (Non-Claim) Household (Non-Claim) 

Figure 7.2-3a: Complaint Resolved Satisfactorily

80

75

70

65

60

55

50

Non-Claim: Agree or Strongly Agree (%)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
41

Commercial (Claim) Household (Claim) 

Figure 7.2-3b: Complaint Resolved Satisfactorily

80

75

70

65

60

55

50

Claim: Agree or Strongly Agree (%)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Composite

Safety Reliability Energy Efficiency

Quality of Cut

Figure 7.2-4: Commercial Customer Expectations Met

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Customer Expectations Met: 

Agree or Strongly Agree (%)

Comfort/Sleek Design Composite

Safety Reliability Energy Efficiency

Figure 7.2-5: Household Customer Expectations Met

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Customer Expectations Met: 

Agree or Strongly Agree (%)

7.2a(2) The types of buying decisions for commercial and

household market customers segmented by “repeat customer,”

“referred by end-user,” and “new customer” are shown in

Figures 7.2-6 and 7.2-7. Customer advocacy for our product

is evident in the “referred by end-user” segment and is the key

driver for our household customers. Customer loyalty for our

Repeat Customer Referred by End-user

Figure 7.2-6: Commercial Customer Types

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Commercial

 Customer Types (%)

New Customer

Referred by End-user Repeat Customer

Figure 7.2-7: Household Customer Types

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Household

 Customer Types (%)

New Customer

product is evident in the “repeat customer” segment and is

the key driver for our commercial customers. “Referred” and

“repeat” customer types combined currently represent more

than 70% of buying decisions for all customers! Additionally,

see Increase in Dealers Over Time (Figure 7.1-2) segmented

by size of dealers and markets. Starting in 2015, we requested

that our dealers issue a new post-purchase survey using the

NPS approach to get another means to determine brand loyalty.

Figure 7.2-8 shows the customer NPS; see 7.3a(3) for information on the NPS.

Figure 7.2-8: Customer Net Promotor Score

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

-10

Customer Net Promoter Score

2015 2016 2017

Commercial Household Excellent Good 
42

7.3 Workforce Results

7.3a Workforce-Focused Results

7.3a(1) A key to success at GG is ensuring that the right

people with the right knowledge and skills are in the right job

at the right time. Reviewing, analyzing, and evaluating workforce capability and capacity is an ongoing effort. Enhancing

our capacity requirements is associated with increasing the

productivity of the current workforce through management and

process improvements.

GG maintains an active focus on workplace health and safety.

OSHA Recordable Rate (Figure 7.3-1; RTB BSC–Safety)

reports the OSHA metric and provides comparisons against

our industry and parent, Gateway. GG engages associates

during Learning Communities and other meetings in identifying potential hazards in the workplace. Our culture is focused

on employee communication of potential hazardous issues.

Figure 7.3-2 (RTB BSC–Safety) reports the “Days Away Case

Rate,” an OSHA metric, and provides comparisons against our

industry and Gateway.

We carefully plan the type and level of associates we add to

our workforce to optimize both capabilities and capacity. As

shown in Figure 7.3-3 (RTB BSC–People), we place a higher

emphasis on increasing our levels of cross-trained associates to

ensure sustainability. After cross training, associates’ relative

maturity is monitored over time to ensure that we’re making

progress, as shown in Figure 7.3-4.

GG effectively manages our manpower capacity in order to

meet business needs and minimize reductions in the workforce. Figures 7.3-5 through 7.3-7 shows these results.

Figure 7.3-1: OSHA Recordable Rate

5

4

3

2

1

0

OSHA Recordable Rate (200K Man-Hours)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

GG Comparison Gateway Division BLS 1st Quartile BLS DOL Mean

GG Comparison Gateway Division BLS 1st Quartile BLS DOL Mean

Figure 7.3-2: Days Away from Work Rate

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

Days Away from Work Rate (200K Man-Hours)

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Hourly Salaried Management Overall (Weighted) IW Best-Plants

Figure 7.3-3: Competency Rate

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Rate (%, Cross-Trained

in 1 or more)

Master Accomplished Management

Figure 7.3-4: Cross-Training Maturity Across Processes

100

80

60

40

20

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Maturity (%, Hourly)

Novice

Figure 7.3-5: Turnover Fill

20

15

10

5

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Promotions to 

Entry-Level Hire

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Internal External Internal Cumulative

Cumulative
43

Figure 7.3-6: Capacity: Workforce Needs Calculator

32

28

24

20

16

12

8

Units Produced (x1,000)

0

Putting Greens (10M-H/Unit)

Total Man-Hours (x1,000)

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 450 400

Commercial (12M-H/Unit)

Homestead (13M-H/Unit)

Figure 7.3-7: Scheduling Options to Meet Demand

390

370

350

330

310

290

Total # of Associates

Total Man-Hours (x1,000)

500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950

2–8 hr x 5 days x 48 wks + 1 Sat per month (2–8 hr)

2–10 hr x 5 days x 48 wks

7.3a(2) GG provides a work environment that is safe, healthy,

and productive. Figure 7.3-8 shows top-decile (against IW

Best Plants comparison data) satisfaction with health, safety,

security, accessibility, and benefits.

Figure 7.3-9 (RTB BSC–People) outlines the turnover

rate, which show a stable workforce. Figure 7.3-10 (RTB

BSC–People) shows a favorable trend in associate and salaried

absenteeism.

7.3a(3) At GG, we believe that associates who are engaged

with their work perform more productively and effectively.

Therefore, we review key drivers to engagement. Figure 7.3-11

shows GG’s increasing engagement survey results over three

GG Voluntary GG Involuntary

Comparison Gateway Division SHRM Top Quartile

Figure 7.3-9: Turnover Rate

8

6

4

2

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Turnover Rate (%)

GG Hourly GG Salaried/Management

Comparison Gateway Division SHRM Top Quartile

Figure 7.3-10: Absence Rate

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Absence Rate (%)
44

years. Additionally, in the bottom row of data is the NPS,

which was a new instrument in 2015 for both associates and

customers (see Figure 7.2-8). According to the NPS vendor,

the thresholds to evaluate the NPS are Good 0, Excellent 50, and World-Class 75.

7.3a(4) GG makes a considerable investment in continuous

workforce and leader development and training. Figure 7.3-12

shows GG’s average hours of quantifiable learning, which

exceeds national benchmarks.

GG invests in the future through leadership development,

shown in Figure 7.3-12 through associate training (hourly,

salaried, and management) and Figure 7.3-13 through degree

completion. Over the last five years, there have been four

leadership position openings, with three of those (75%) having

been filled by internal candidates whom we prepared for these

roles. Our strategy is to develop our talent and promote from

within.

GG launched LSS techniques and tools as a strategic part

of our journey toward performance excellence. We have

continued to expand and improve our LSS capabilities and

participation throughout the organization. Our dedication

to continuous improvement has resulted in a growing cadre

of Green Belts and Black Belts who lead our improvement

efforts. As shown in Figure 7.3-14, GG significantly surpasses

the benchmark indicated. The effectiveness of this training

is shown in Figure 7.1-19 (Learning Communities and LSS

Projects ROI), with a cumulative savings (ROI) over the last

five years of more than $2,000,000.

MBA Degree

Figure 7.3-13: Degree Completion

10

8

6

4

2

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Degree Completion

while at GG

80

60

40

20

0

AA Degree BA/BS Degree

SHRM Top Quartile (1%)

Cumulative Total

Cumulative Total
45

7.4 Leadership and Governance Outcomes 

7.4a Leadership, Governance, and Societal 

Responsibility Results 

7.4a(1) GG’s senior leaders apply a robust Communication

System (Figure 1.1-2) to communicate with associates about

the vision and values, SOs and APs, company direction, and/

or concerns and other topics. We continually improve our

approach to ensure workforce engagement. Figure 7.4-1 shows

a positive trend in employee responses to the deploying of the

vision and values, two-way communication, and creation of

a focus on action. Additional measures are available on-site

(AOS).

7.4a(2) GG’s finances are carefully audited every year, both

by internal and external auditors. Figure 7.4-2 reports governance and fiscal accountability. Governance accountability

results show high performance. In fiscal accountability, GG

has had approximately the same number of these audits each

year with no findings. Additional measures AOS.

7.4a(3) GG’s Governance System requires absolute compliance with the multitude of regulations under which we operate.

Any critical regulatory actions against us could literally shut

down our business. Figure 7.4-3 details GG’s strict level of

compliance to our key laws and regulations. Our dedication

to continuous improvement has resulted in GG consistently

exceeding regulatory requirements. As a result of our improvement efforts, from 2013 to 2017, GG has achieved 100%

compliance in audit findings. Additional measures AOS.

7.4a(4) As discussed in category 1, ethical behavior is a

component of our training program and our culture. Figure

7.4-4 displays the survey results and violations data that we

use to evaluate the degree of ethical behavior in the organization. Survey results are at top decile, and we have maintained

zero violations for five years. Additional measures AOS.
46

7.4a(5) As a part of our societal responsibility, GG is

committed to educating our youth through outreach events and

providing experiential learning to college students. GG is also

passionate about emergency preparedness—not just for our

plant but also for our entire community. Figure 7.4-5 displays

the involvement commitment that we have sustained since

2013. Additional measures AOS.

GG and our associates support local communities through

support and education, as shown in Figure 7.4-6. While not

shown in Figure 7.4-6, our leaders and associates also commit

time as well as dollars to our communities; details are AOS.

Figure 7.4-6 indicates the heavy involvement our leaders and

associates have with our communities, including emergency

management with the school system, city government, and
47

citizen groups; participation in key community events; and

high school and community college education. The results of

the efforts by GG leadership and associates demonstrate our

commitment to our values: *Be Proud *Lead *Think Critically,

and *Respect Others.

7.4b Strategy Implementation

From the beginning of the GG journey toward performance

excellence, our focus has been on performance and continuous

improvement in all aspects of our strategy. Through workforce

engagement, strong relationships, rigorous processes, challenging metrics and systematic review, analysis, and improvement,

we have obtained results that place us as a high-performing

company. Utilizing our SPP and AP Process, we carefully

gather, analyze, and evaluate data to assess performance and

make mid-course corrections (agility), as needed. Figure 7.4-7

details positive trends and levels of those plans. Examples

of current APs are given in Figure 2.1-3, along with the

associated change-the-business (CTB) SOs. See also, Overall

Equipment Effectiveness (Figure 7.1-13), Learning Communities and LSS Projects ROI (Figure 7.1-19), Lean Six-Sigma

Belts Trained (Figure 7.3-14), Gross Margin (Figure 7.5-3),

and New Markets (Figure 7.5-9).

Figures 7.4-8 and 7.4-9 illustrate the multiyear tactical activity

to enhance the existing core competency of talent development

in preparation for an anticipated future core competency of

value engineering, by improving the function or reducing the

cost of our value creation processes. Additionally, this tactical

activity helps address our SC1-technical associate retention by

making the tasks more meaningful for the operator/repair and

allowing our dedicated maintenance associates to focus more

attention on constraints rather than routine activities.

Strategic Initiatives Tactical Action Plans

Figure 7.4-7: Achievement of Organizational Strategy 

and Action Plans

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

100

95

90

85

80

Achievement (%)

Document

Equipment

Hazard Analysis

Training

Lock Out/

Try Out Training

OTJ Task

Training

2014 2015 2016

Figure 7.4-8: Operator / Repair Concept Preparation

100

80

60

40

20

0

Preparation (%)

Figure 7.4-9: Operator / Repair Task Implementation

100

80

60

40

20

0

 Eligible Associates (%)

2015 2016 2017 2018 Proj

Clean Inspect Lubricate Adjust
48

7.5 Financial and Market Results

7.5a Financial and Market Results

7.5a(1) Gateway provides product design, marketing, and

sales; GG’s value stream is fabrication, paint, and assembly.

The direct materials used represent about 75% of our cost of

goods sold (COGS), as shown in Figure 7.5.1.

Accordingly, supply-chain management (SCM) of purchased

products and services is key to our success, along with

reducing internal losses in the value stream by continuous

improvement and breakthrough innovation. To incentivize GG

and achieve proper objective alignment, the parent company

created a model (Figure 7.5-2) based on an inverse relationship

of “direct materials used % of COGS” to derive the “gross

margin” used in establishing the dealer invoice price.

The derived gross margin over the last five years has increased

two percentage points (from 23% to 25%), as shown in Figure

7.5-3, which represents an overall indication (profitability)

of the effectiveness of our strategic direction, initiatives, and

action plans! The future focus is on sustaining these gains,

while continually addressing the diminishing return nature of

opportunities.

The favorable trend in growth of gross revenue and margin

is shown in Figure 7.5-4, with the respective produced units

(volume) given in Figure 7.1-5. The revenue per associate

has reached an impressive $625,000 level (Figure 7.5-5).

Figure 7.5-1: Cost of Goods Sold 

100

80

60

40

20

0

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Cost (%)

Direct Materials Used Direct Labor Used Overhead Assigned

Figure 7.5-2: Model Used to Establish Dealer Invoice Price

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

79 78 77 74 73

Gross Margin (%)

Direct Materials Used % of COGS (%)

76 75

Figure 7.5-3: Gross Margin

25.5

25.0

24.5

24.0

23.5

23.0

22.5

22.0

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Gross Margin (%)

GG illustrates stable performance in managing accounts

receivable and payable in Figure 7.5-6, with the respective

account terms being a directive from the parent company.

Increases in derived gross margin and volume have resulted in

a favorable trend in net profit, as shown in Figure 7.5-7 (RTB

BSC–Cost).
49

Figure 7.5-4: Gross Revenue and Margin

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Gross Revenue and Margin ($)

Gross Revenue (Millions) Gross Margin (Millions)

Figure 7.5-5: Total Revenue Per Associate

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Total Revenue per Associate ($1,000)

Figure 7.5-6: Accounts Receivable and Payable

50

40

30

20

10

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Accounts Receivable and Payable

AR Days Outstanding AP Days Outstanding

AR 45-Day Terms AP 30-Day Terms

Figure 7.5-7: Net Profit

16

14

12

10

8

6

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Net Profit and Other Expenses (%)

Net Profit (Millions)

AR 45-Day Terms

50

40

30

20

10

0

Net Profit ($)

Other Expenses (% of Revenue)

7.5a(2) Sales and marketing (loading) are a function of the

parent company, with our responsibility being to determine

our available capacity and capability to support continued

growth in demand. For example, based on our TEEP, shown

in Figures 7.1-14a,b, we are only at about a 50% utilization

(of time) based on a calendar year. The relative market share

is segmented by our three product offerings and shows our

strategic growth in putting greens and commercial, which are

higher-priced (value-add) offerings; whereas, homestead is a

lower-priced (commodity-type) offering impacted by off-shore

competition (Figure 7.5-8).
50

Figure 7.5-8: Relative Market Share

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Relative Market Share (%)

Homestead Commercial

Putting Greens

Design and thus new markets (entered), as shown in Figure

7.5-9, are a function of the parent company, with our responsibility to be an engaged participant in the project management

and manufacturing processes to ensure a successful launch.
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program 

Created by Congress in 1987, the Baldrige Program 

(http://www.nist.gov/baldrige) is managed by the National 

Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an agency 

of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The program helps 

organizations improve their performance and succeed in the 

competitive global marketplace. It is the only public-private 

partnership and Presidential award program dedicated to 

improving U.S. organizations. The program administers the 

Presidential Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.

In collaboration with the greater Baldrige community, 

we provide organizations with

 • a systems approach to achieving organizational 

 excellence;

 • organizational self-assessment tools;

 • analysis of organizational strengths and opportunities 

 for improvement by a team of trained experts; and

 • educational presentations, conferences, and workshops 

 on proven best management practices and on using 

 the Baldrige Excellence Framework to improve.

Foundation for the Malcolm Baldrige 

National Quality Award

The mission of the Baldrige Foundation is to ensure 

the long-term financial growth and viability of the 

Baldrige Performance Excellence Program and to support 

organizational performance excellence in the United States 

and throughout the world. To learn more about the Baldrige 

Foundation, see http://www.baldrigepe.org/foundation.

Alliance for Performance Excellence

The Alliance (http://www.baldrigepe.org/alliance) is a 

national network of Baldrige-based organizations with a 

mission to grow performance excellence in support of a 

thriving Baldrige community. Alliance members contribute 

more than $30 million per year in tools, resources, and 

expertise to assist organizations on their journey to 

excellence. Alliance member programs also serve as 

a feeder system for the national Baldrige Award. 

American Society for Quality

The American Society for Quality (ASQ; http://www.asq.org/) 

assists in administering the award program under contract 

to NIST. ASQ’s vision is to make quality a global priority, an 

organizational imperative, and a personal ethic and, in the 

process, to become the community for all who seek quality 

concepts, technology, or tools to improve themselves and 

their world.

 

 For more information:

 www.nist.gov/baldrige | 301.975.2036 | baldrige@nist.gov

The ratio of the Baldrige Program’s benefits 

for the U.S. economy to its costs is estimated

at 820 to 1.

99 Baldrige Award 

winners serve as national 

role models.

2010 –2014 award applicants represent 

537,871 jobs, 

2,520 work sites, over $80 billion in 

revenue/budgets, and more than 436 million 

customers served.

364 Baldrige examiners volunteered 

roughly $5.5 million in 

services in 2014.

State Baldrige-based examiners 

volunteered around $30 million in 

services in 2014.