An underlying issue of measures is their ability to present complex
processes. They are find if you have a very consistent process which at
least the output can be fairly represented by a limited set of measures.
If you have a complex, variable and uncertain process and output, which is
common in human services and innovative industries, then measures are a
substantial simplification of reality - and thus present a distortion. In
such cases, rewarding by measures provide perverse incentives to enhance
the measures, rather than address the real task. The following book
details the history of the use of performance indicators in government
(mainly Britain) and compares it with use in the private sector. It
highlights the need to complement measures with personal undertanding of
the work, even in the most simple industries.
Carter, N., Klein R. and Day P., How Organisations Measure Success: The
Use of Performance Indicators in Government London: New York m1992.
Yours
Gray Southon
At 06:20 PM 29/10/97 -0800, Richard C. Holloway wrote:
>This is a wonderful dialog, and I appreciate the thoughtfulness you each
>have brought to it. I simply wanted to comment that in open,
>process-oriented, organizations, each individual can influence what gets
>measured. This integrates individual and organizational values, and
>represents a more diverse set of stakeholders in the process, behavior and
>outcomes. It also tends to build that sense of cohesion and camaradery
>that I appreciate so much when I experience it in a team of colleagues.
>
>Doc
Gray Southon
Consultant in Health Management Research and Analysis
15 Parthenia St., Caringbah, NSW 2229, Australia
Ph/Fax +61 2 9524 7822, mobile +61 414 295 328
e-mail gsouthon@ozemail.com.au
Web Page: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~gsouthon/
--Gray Southon <gsouthon@ozemail.com.au>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>