Performance Measurement System

If the performance measurement system has been properly designed, developed, and implemented, man­aging the process and using the measurements should be a rela­tively easy task. Although some resistance may be encountered ini­tially, this may be overcome through additional communication and fine tuning of the measure­ments. One should remember that organizations don't resist change, people do, and the key to overcom­ing resistance was back in the design and development stage. By involving those who will be mea­sured early on in the process, and allowing them to provide input to the process, ownership is devel­oped. Few employees will resist a program that they actively partici­pated in developing.

The second major key to overcom­ing resistance to performance meas­urements relates to the earlier comment regarding accountability vs. responsibility. As defined by

Webster:

• "Responsibility implies holding a specific office, duty, or trust

• "Accountability suggests imminence of retribution for unful­filled trust or violation of obligation ..."

• "Liability stresses the fact of subjection to review, censure, or control by a designated authority ..."

If we hope to hold an organization accountable or liable for the performance of a process or function, then that organization must also be responsible for the major factors that impact that process. Control over one's destiny is key to motivation. If I don't feel that I can reasonably control the outcome, I will resist any effort to hold me accountable for the process. If, however, I am given responsibility for the key inputs to the process, then I can be held accountable and liable and the measurements become part of the job contract that exists between a subordinate and superior.

Depending on the management style prevalent in the organization, it may be appropriate to post the results of all measurements in conspicuous areas to be reviewed by all employees. Doing so both generates peer pressure to perform, and facilitates management by wandering around (MBWA).

It is worth noting at this point that we should be focusing on performance of the process, not the performance of an individual worker. The ultimate goal here is to optimize our performance to the Critical Success Factors, evaluation of employee performance is a separate issue entirely.

One final note, when setting goals for performance improvement, the need for small incremental improvements should be balanced with the possibility of dramatic changes to generate dramatic results. It is often worthwhile to set targets that may at first seem completely unrealistic (ie, to reduce defects by 95%). Doing so forces us to view the process from a completely fresh perspective, perhaps to find a whole new way to accomplish the objective, as opposed to looking for small, detailed improvements to the process. Each method has its place, just as both the short pass and the long bomb have their place in football.