Recently, I spent three years working in performance management for a private sector company. The company was growing rapidly and needed a powerful set of management tools to help it manage that growth. I had the opportunity to help lead that effort, based on my experience having worked in Managing For Results in Metro Nashville/Davidson County, TN.
The company used a powerful software system to handle the collection and reporting of their performance information. Unfortunately, although the software was powerful, it wasn’t very accessible – in fact, to get data o
ut of the system, the company had to hire someone whose only job was to create queries and pull data from the system. If you wanted performance information, many times you had to go and ask for it.
So while the performance information was meaningful and used in high-level management discussions, for most employees it was something “they” -- the senior managers and leaders -- paid attention to.
Unfortunately, we all know that it is far too common in organizations of all types, private or public sector, that instead of performance data driving decision-making at all levels, the data is closely held, or feared, or ignored.
So how does performance data get a regular seat at the table for how we do business? How does it move from being something “they” use to something “we” need?
What we’ve seen over and over again is that you have to begin by recognizing that data collection and reporting cannot be done in a vacuum. You cannot expect one person, or a small team, to be the only ones involved in collecting, analyzing and reporting the performance data for an organization – and then have those results resonate at all levels of the organization.
How could they? In this situation, for nearly everyone in the organization, performance is something “they” worry about. Most of the team – most of “us” - played no part in the collection and analysis.
In many cases, it simply comes down to the systems and programs. If you manage your performance information using a powerful system with lots of bells and whistles – but which is not easy to use or accessible – the majority of your employees may never know how to utilize or have the desire to try to use the system.
So in the end, it doesn’t necessarily take a village to transform government, but it does take the government as a whole (managers and employees alike) defining, collecting, analyzing, reporting and having conversations about results. You don’t have to do it all at one time, but you do have to do it. Only then can you hope to truly drive meaningful change at all levels. That’s your transformation!
The company used a powerful software system to handle the collection and reporting of their performance information. Unfortunately, although the software was powerful, it wasn’t very accessible – in fact, to get data o
ut of the system, the company had to hire someone whose only job was to create queries and pull data from the system. If you wanted performance information, many times you had to go and ask for it.So while the performance information was meaningful and used in high-level management discussions, for most employees it was something “they” -- the senior managers and leaders -- paid attention to.
Unfortunately, we all know that it is far too common in organizations of all types, private or public sector, that instead of performance data driving decision-making at all levels, the data is closely held, or feared, or ignored.
So how does performance data get a regular seat at the table for how we do business? How does it move from being something “they” use to something “we” need?
What we’ve seen over and over again is that you have to begin by recognizing that data collection and reporting cannot be done in a vacuum. You cannot expect one person, or a small team, to be the only ones involved in collecting, analyzing and reporting the performance data for an organization – and then have those results resonate at all levels of the organization.
How could they? In this situation, for nearly everyone in the organization, performance is something “they” worry about. Most of the team – most of “us” - played no part in the collection and analysis.
In many cases, it simply comes down to the systems and programs. If you manage your performance information using a powerful system with lots of bells and whistles – but which is not easy to use or accessible – the majority of your employees may never know how to utilize or have the desire to try to use the system.
So in the end, it doesn’t necessarily take a village to transform government, but it does take the government as a whole (managers and employees alike) defining, collecting, analyzing, reporting and having conversations about results. You don’t have to do it all at one time, but you do have to do it. Only then can you hope to truly drive meaningful change at all levels. That’s your transformation!
This is a very nice point - that the AUDIENCE for performance information really matters. It brings in the notion of buy-in which most people understand is important for any initiative to succeed in the medium to long term.
ReplyDeleteWhat I really like about this idea is the use of generic pronouns...."we" all use "them" and "us" on a regular basis - and "we" know who "they" are. The problem is that the "they" changes depending on the situation - sometimes it is people from a different department, or a different management level, or from inside or outside the organization.
But that truly is the beauty of this idea - the "they" is organic and changes - but whenever "they" are driving the performance system - well "we" can never really trust "them"....can "we"?