At 11:51 PM 10/22/97 -0400, Rol Fessenden wrote:
> I would argue that the best companies use a mix of measures and
>other ways to assess the state of the organization. And I agree that we
>need to go beyond -- way beyond--financial measures. On the other hand, if
>you have an organization that misleads itself, doing away with measures
>will not solve the problem.
RIGHT ON!!
Companies have no choice but to use a mixture. Even when management
diligently decides what to measure their mind sets and visions dominate
their questions. These management questions are more influential than the
official measures but to some degree are influenced by the measures.
Managers and workers alike believe the measures have been intelligently
selected and so are influenced by them. That in turn influences their
questions and staff meeting agendas. Those agenda are a strong form of
measurement that gets to management's biggest fear, the fear of looking
foolish. The fear of looking foolish drives executive to prepare
endlessly for those meetings. That in turn sets the priorities for his or
her staff activity.
What management has decided to measure at best influences these agendas.
> Therefore, When you say, "I think this points to the heart of the
>problem. Weaknesses of people lead us to take the easy way out and focus
>on the measures. We then get measure serving behaviuor and a pressure for
>people to deliver the measures not necessarily the behaviours or
>performance goals of which the measures are only an indicator." I agree
>with the first sentence, but I have observed that eliminating the measures
>does not solve the problem. I also see other people who have the same
>measures, but avoid being slave to the numbers. So I think you solve the
>problem by focusing on the root of it, which is the people. This is the
>essence of good management and leadership.
Your right eliminating the measures is not the solution. Nor are measures
the problem. Sometimes they are part of the solution. The best reason to
measure is to force management to actually take time to decide what is in
the best interest of the organization. And if they then adjust their
questions to support the measures there can be real progress. To repeat
the most influential measures are items on the boss's agenda and his
questions. No matter how well the metrics are chosen. This is true whether
the boss thought about it or is just a wild cannon.
The vision of the truth held by the boss needs to be in concert with the
metrics. If it is not we cause mistrust and frustration.
> We measure attitudes and commitment of employees through anonymous
>questionairres. We measure customer satisfaction the same way. It is
>somewhat subjective, and we think that is a strength. Needs change over
>time, and the results should reflect that. When we are brutally honest
>with ourselves, wc accept the trends as our responsibility. When we aren't
>strong enough to do that, we find external causes. Almost invariably, when
>we accepted responsibility, we struggled, gained insight, and learned
>something.
We should care about attitude but we should also realize it is caused by
management actions. Management actions are influenced by what is measured
and what is on the bosses agenda. Hopefully the two are compatible but not
that often unfortunately..
> Rol Fessenden
> 76234.3636@compuserve.com
Eugene Taurman
interLinx ilx@execpc.com http://www.execpc.com/~ilx
What you are is determined by the thoughts that dominate your mind.
Paraphrase of Proverbs 23 Ch7
--Eugene Taurman <ilx@execpc.com>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>