Replying to LO27558 --
Rol Fessenden said in part:
It is extremely difficult to develop measures that are unambiguous and are
difficult to manipulate.Whether we like it or not measures and audits are
threatening to people. And as a consequence people invest at least as much
time protecting themselves from the outcome of the measure or the audit as
they invest in learning from the outcome of the measurement process or the
audit.My learning is that it is extremely difficult to develop unambiguous
measures or audits.
Chris Macrae replies:
My experience is the same as yours so that's why the idea we are
developing starts in a different place from all established measurement
systems built round tangible maths - our audit may threaten measurers but
doesn't need to threaten any of a company's other experts!
We get each expert in a stakeholder to map out what value promises the
organisation is making at any level of segmentation that the company
currently operates around. eg lets consider Organisational Development and
similar experts in the stakeholder of employees: -research shows that
young professionals have different value wants (loyalty drivers toward
organisation) than mature managers than people who are being asked by the
company to move from departments to virtual teams and so forth.
http://www.egroups.com/group/brandreform/peopleneeds.htm The company
cannot make and keep relationship promises to every segment but it should
transparently select which ones it is designing organisational value for.
The same sort of audit sub-maps apply for each stakeholder. We then put
them all together and are concerned primarily to develop a visual map of
all of a company's relationship promises auditing them initially in a
binary way: -1 or green - company's current operating model keeps this
promise -0 or red - company's current operating model often breaks this
promise when another stakeholder's need conflicts with it
thus we have built up a systems relationship analysis map of green and red
links. If every link was green, you'd have a perfect value productivity
model in which every stakeholders needs reinforced every others. Whilst
that's unlikely to happen the immediate learning purpose of this mapping
works as a risk audit:
-are there so many reds around that the company should innovate a better
model of its business relationships?
-are there particular red links which if they completely broke (turned
out to be 100% stakeholder lie) could cause all sorts of value destruction
knock-on effects across the system?
At the first level of development, our audit's main purpose is to provide
a common language and visual mental model around which all managers and
experts can communicate - and see the productivity of the company's
relationship capital as a system. By having a common framework we can
facilitate benchmarking between experts in a particular stakeholder as
they clarify which stakeholder values are changing or connecting in new
ways (eg as stakeholders increasingly network). We can also start to add
quantifications of how huge value destructions were caused by particular
missing links. So over time we can put more expert-estimated magnitudes
into the simulation; but the first purpose of this audit is to negotiate
common agreement between all those who expertly care about stakeholders
they serve but without the usual numerical abstractions/aggregations of
measurement experts getting in the way
I hope I have answered your measurement concerns.They are in fact why we
are designing a pure logic system which responds to these human concerns,
and inviting every expert to come open source our method and visual
representation of their particular stakeholder relationship understanding
chris macrae, wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
--------------------------------------------
Chief Brand Officers Association
London & Washington DC
CHRIS MACRAE
Director of Virtual Teams
email wcbn007@easynet.co.uk
______________________________________
CBO is open-source sponsor of Brand Value Exchange - Audit Standard for
Intangibles & Win-Win Human Relationships. BVE Fieldbook (in press).
Worldwide register of local chapters on request. Associate webs:
allaboutbranding.com & normanmacrae.com
________________________________________
--"chris macrae" <wcbn007@easynet.co.uk>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.