The Perils of Performance Measurement
Download as PPTX, PDF1 like971 views
The document discusses the perils of performance measurement and how measuring performance is more complex than simply using "SMART" indicators. It provides three key points: 1. Not everything that counts can be counted, and performance measurement should not encourage the wrong behaviors by focusing on the wrong metrics. 2. Performance measurement must consider its purpose and use appropriate indicators for goals like budgeting, celebrating successes, evaluation, and improvement. No single metric can achieve all purposes. 3. Intangible factors like culture, leadership, and human capital are also important for performance but difficult to measure, requiring a holistic approach beyond technical metrics.
The Perils of Performance Measurement
- 1. The views expressed in this presentation are the views of the author/s and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Asian Development Bank, or its Board of Governors, or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this presentation and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The countries listed in this presentation do not imply any view on ADB's part as to sovereignty or independent status or necessarily conform to ADB's terminology. The Perils of Performance Measurement Olivier Serrat 2015
- 2. Measuring What Matters The need to sell the idea that management improves things means that "SMART" performance indicators—customarily aligned in a results chain linking activities, inputs, outputs, and outcome to impact—proliferate. (Supposedly, pre–post comparisons can then be made to assess the relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability, and impact of endeavors.) But, not everything that counts can be counted and not everything that can be counted counts. What is more, people— responding to incentives—will often do what measurement summons them to; so, measure the wrong things and you will almost certainly encourage the wrong behaviors. "SMART" indicators are to be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound.
- 3. SMART But Not So Smart • Conflicting definitions of performance indicators abound. In their shortest yet most stringent and frequent expression, indicators are a numerical measure of the degree to which an objective is being achieved. (So, they are prone to merge with objectives and effectively become targets.) Others consider them an discernible change or event that provides evidence that something has happened, be that an output delivered, an immediate effect occurred, or a long-term process observed. To such discerning interpreters, indicators do not offer proof so much as reliable clues that the change or event being claimed has actually happened or is happening: rather, evidence from several indicators will make a convincing case for claims being made. First
- 4. SMART But Not So Smart • Complex issues of cause-and-effect are seldom considered. Obviously, performance indicators can only pertain to matters that an agency controls. But, agencies never command much and usually settle for subprime indicators that afford enough control for their purposes. This reality is intrinsic to all human endeavors, especially those that touch political decision making or aim to spark social change. Consequently, interest has grown in approaches to planning, monitoring, and evaluation of outcomes and their metrics that consider actor-centered development and behavioral change, continuous learning and flexibility, participation and accountability, as well as non-linearity and contribution (not attribution and control). Second
- 5. SMART But Not So Smart • The dimensions of performance mentioned earlier— namely, relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, sustainability, and impact—intimate that there can be no single assessment of accomplishments overall. Performance is an amalgam of dimensions, some of which may conflict. Measuring it calls for an appropriate basket of benchmarks, developed with full knowledge of their interrelationships. Third
- 6. SMART But Not So Smart • Performance measurement must have a purpose—it can never be an end in itself. Robert Behn notes that distinct reasons for engaging in it are to budget, celebrate, control, evaluate, improve, learn, motivate, and promote. Manifestly, no single metric is appropriate for all eight objectives. Therefore, practitioners had better consider the managerial purpose(s) to which performance measurement might contribute—these, alas, being ordinarily to budget and control—and how they might best deploy an informative blend of measures anchored in context. Only then will they be able to select valid yardsticks with the characteristics necessary to help meet each purpose, directly and indirectly, concentrating on what matters most. Fourth
- 7. SMART But Not So Smart • Many other things besides performance indicators are needed to ameliorate achievements (after the indicators have been recognized for what they are, namely, individual links in a results chain). The other requisites include Board, Management, and staff who are focused on meeting the explicit and latent needs of client, audiences, and partners; leadership and commitment to developing and extending products and services; and a culture of openness in which personnel are encouraged and willing to question why they do what they do. Fifth
- 8. Why Measure Performance? Budget On what programs, projects, or people should my organization spend the public's money? Celebrate What accomplishments are worthy of the important organizational ritual of celebrating success? Control How can I make sure that my staff is doing the right thing? Evaluate How well is my organization performing? Improve What exactly should who do differently to improve performance? Learn Why is something working or not working? Motivate How can I motivate line staff, middle managers, nonprofit and for-profit collaborators, stakeholders, or citizens to do what is needed to raise performance?Promote How can I convince political superiors, legislators, stakeholders, journalists, or citizens that my organization is doing a good job
- 9. Matching Measure to Purpose Budget Efficiency measures—specifically, outputs or outcomes divided by inputs Celebrate Periodic and significant performance targets that, when achieved, provide people with a sense of personal and collective accomplishment Control Inputs that can be regulated Evaluate Outcomes—combined with input, output, and process measures—that also appreciate the effects of exogenous factors Improve Inside-the-black-box relationships that connect changes in operations to changes in outputs and outcomes Learn Disaggregated data that reveals deviancies from the projected Motivate Near real-time outputs compared with production targets Promote Easily understood aspects of performance about which people care
- 10. Transforming Performance Measurement Cynics argue that performance measures are seldom used to make decisions. Yet, they do have effects from the suspicion that actions, e.g., sanctions or rewards, might be based on such information. People will search what behaviors and related activities are recompensed and then endeavor to perform or "game" these, often to the exclusion of things not rewarded. In general, moral codes and professional standards should suffice to prescribe right action. Next, measures must better match purpose. Lastly, what matters most are intangible sources of value, such as human, relational, and structural capital, that challenge traditional, technical approaches. Earnings can be pliable as putty when a charlatan heads the company reporting them.— Warren Buffett
- 11. On Performance Leadership Good performance cannot be compelled, commanded, or coerced. Most professionals are self- motivated but intrinsic drive must be channeled skillfully to excite, engage, and energize. Therefore, performance measurement must restrain demotivators, e.g., office politics, and build motivators, e.g., fairness, so people may strive to do their best. In an environment of positive accountability, collaboration, truth-telling, and learning would be rewarded, not just hitting all- too-often senseless targets. It is more a matter of helping managers manage, not making or letting them manage. The better practices that Robert Behn recommends relate to (i) creating the performance framework, (ii) driving performance improvement, and (iii) learning to enhance performance.
- 12. Better Practices to Ratchet Up Performance Creating the Performance Framework (What would it mean to do a better job?) • Practice 1: Articulate the organization's mission: proclaim—clearly and frequently—what the organization is trying to accomplish. • Practice 2: Identify the organization's most consequential performance deficit: determine what key failure is keeping the organization from achieving its mission. • Practice 3: Establish a specific performance target: specify what new level of success the organization needs to achieve next. • Practice 4: Clarify your theoretical link between target and mission: define (for yourself, at least) the mental model that explains how meeting the target will help accomplish the mission.
- 13. Better Practices to Ratchet Up Performance Driving Performance Improvement (How can one mobilize people?) • Practice 5: Monitor and report progress frequently, personally, and publicly: publish the data so that every team knows that you know (and that everyone else knows) how well every team is doing. • Practice 6: Build operational capacity: provide your teams with what they need to achieve their targets. • Practice 7: Take advantage of small wins to reward success: find lots of reasons to dramatize that you recognize and appreciate what teams have accomplished. • Practice 8: Create "esteem opportunities": ensure that people can earn a sense of accomplishment and thus gain both self-esteem and the esteem of their peers.
- 14. Better Practices to Ratchet Up Performance Learning to Enhance Performance (How must one change to do even better?) • Practice 9: Check for distortions and mission accomplishment: verify that people are achieving their targets in a way that furthers the mission (not in a way that fails to help or actually undermines this effort). • Practice 10: Analyze many and various indicators: examine many forms of data—both quantitative and qualitative—to learn how your organization can improve. • Practice 11: Adjust mission, target, theory, monitoring and reporting, operational capacity, rewards, esteem opportunities, and/or analysis: act on this learning, making the modifications necessary to ratchet up performance again.
- 15. Further Reading • ADB. 2009. Learning from Evaluation. Manila. www.adb.org/publications/learning-evaluation • ADB. 2009. Understanding Complexity. Manila. www.adb.org/publications/understanding-complexity • ADB. 2010. The Perils of Performance Measurement. Manila. www.adb.org/publications/perils-performance-measurement • ADB. 2010. Bridging Organizational Silos. Manila. www.adb.org/publications/bridging-organizational-silos • Robert Behn. 2003. Why Measure Performance? Different Purposes Require Different Measures. Public Administration Review. September-October. Vol. 63, No. 5, pp. 586–606.
- 16. Further Reading • Robert Behn. 2006. Performance Leadership: 11 Better Practices That Can Ratchet Up Performance. IBM Center for the Business of Government.
- 17. Quick Response Codes @ADB @ADB Sustainable Development Timeline @Academia.edu @LinkedIn @ResearchGate @Scholar @SlideShare @Twitter