Business Performance Assessment Program Warning Flag 1 – Inwardly Focused Performance Assessments

StrategyDriven Business Performance Assessment Program Warning Flag ArticleOften practiced, it can be highly misleading to base the organization’s performance standards relative only to internally identified best practice methods and characteristics. While at times the organization’s performance does represent the highest standard, it is more likely that individual activities are performed more effectively and efficiently by other organizations, particularly those seeking to improve performance in an effort to compete with perceived industry leaders. Top performers recognize this trap and augment their internal search for effective performance with an outward examination of other relevant businesses.[wcm_restrict plans=”47796, 25542, 25653″]

Organizations that are too inwardly focused tend to lose sight of the business environment and often find aggressive, innovative competitors capturing ever increasing portions of the market. While not all inclusive, the four lists below, Process-Based Warning Flags, Process Execution Warning Flags – Behaviors, Potential, Observable Results, and Potential Causes, are designed to help organization leaders to recognize whether their organization is too internally focused when establishing standards of performance. Only after a problem is recognized and its causes identified can the needed actions be taken to move the organization toward improved performance.

Process-Based Warning Flags

  • business performance assessment processes do not require simultaneous examination of external benchmarks against which internal performance is compared
  • business performance assessment processes do not require the participation of team members from outside the organization or business unit being evaluated
  • business environment monitoring mechanisms do not include close examination of individual and process performance characteristics
  • lack or infrequent execution of external benchmarking

Process Execution Warning Flags – Behaviors

  • executives and managers do not promote the benchmarking and comparison of organizational processes and results to those of other businesses
  • resistance to performance comparisons on the basis that ‘our organization is unique’
  • frequent executive or managerial rebukes to recommended changes based on external benchmarks
  • ‘shoot the messenger’ admonishment is given to business performance assessment team leads and members when identifying performance shortfalls relative to that of other organizations
  • resistance to performance comparisons, particularly via a benchmarking, based on the perception that the activity’s cost (time and expense) would not be justified by its benefit

Potential, Observable Results

  • business performance assessment reports lack comparisons to the performance of other organizations
  • costs of like products and/or services are consistently higher than those of competing organizations
  • declining or smaller profit margins as compared to similar businesses
  • loss of market share

Potential Causes

  • lack of or low organizational accountability
  • fear of job loss if benchmarking reveals more inefficient methods for performing business operations
  • general discomfort with challenging the status quo, resistance to change
  • an organizational culture that resists change on the basis of ‘it was not invented here’ and/or ‘that is not the way we do things here’

[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”47796, 25542, 25653″]


Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.

Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library

Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually).

Not sure? Click here to learn more.

Buy the Article

Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Business Performance Assessment Program Warning Flag 1 – Inwardly Focused Performance Assessments for just $2!

[/wcm_nonmember]Additional Information

The following StrategyDriven recommended best practice is designed to support introduction of external performance information to the business performance assessment process:

StrategyDriven Podcast Episode 5 – Introduction to Organizational Performance Measures

StrategyDriven Podcasts focus on the tools and techniques executives and managers can use to improve their organization’s alignment and accountability to ultimately achieve better results. These podcasts elaborate on the best practice and warning flag posts on the StrategyDriven website.

Episode 5 – Introduction to Organizational Performance Measures serves as a foundation for the upcoming series of podcasts on the best practices associated with organizational performance measures. This discussion…

  • defines organizational performance measures
  • examines the primary uses of performance measures
  • identifies the common characteristics of well constructed performance indicators

[powerpress]


About the Contributor

Nathan Ives, StrategyDriven Principal is a StrategyDriven Principal, and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.

Decision-Making – Evaluating Decision Options, part 2 of 3

Once a decision’s requirements, important value-adding, and nice-to-have characteristics are defined and various options possessing these qualities evaluated, the total value of each alternative must be assessed in order to enable option selection that will most effectively achieve the desired results.[wcm_restrict plans=”49206, 25542, 25653″]

Step 2: Option Value Aggregation

Aggregating each option’s characteristic values is the next step in identifying the most optimal opportunity or problem solution. Because not all of an option’s characteristics are required or even important, the characteristics must be prioritized in order to be aggregated. Each characteristic should be assigned to one of the following three priority categories from Step 1:

Required: critical characteristic with a required minimum satisfaction point threshold below which an unacceptable outcome will result. Figure 2 shows a condition point below which an unacceptable outcome would be realized. All characteristics associated with this point should be designated as required and have a corresponding Required Minimum Satisfaction Point above which the unacceptable outcome will be avoided. (See Figure 1 in the Evaluating Decision Options, part 1 of 3 posting.) Note that all decision options possess at least four required characteristics: risk, cost, ethic, and total value.
Important: non-critical characteristics that add to the option’s overall value. Typically, the aggregate of value added by an option’s several important characteristics must exceed a minimum investment return threshold for the option to be considered.
Nice-to-Have: non-critical characteristics contributing only nominal value. The benefit of nice-to-have characteristics is that they help decision-makers choose between options of otherwise similar value.

Figure 2: Decision-Making Base Model – Hurdle Decisions

For decisions where a single solution is to be pursued, eliminate all options not meeting the needed Required Minimum Satisfaction Point threshold. For all other decisions, a portfolio of options is used to satisfy the necessary minimum requirements and so no options are eliminated at this time.

Important option characteristics are rank ordered according to the value contribution offered. This ranking suggests a weighting to be given some characteristics over others. Recognize that depending on the characteristic, value is either calculated or perceived. Therefore, the preference scheme tends to be both objective and subjective; varying based on the individual or team making the decision.

Combining the weighted value of the required and important characteristics provides the overall value of the option. Nice-to-Have characteristics meeting the Required Minimum Satisfaction Point threshold are listed with their respective options for added consideration in cases where competing options have similar value. It is at this point that the decision-maker or team will select the option(s) to pursue.

Final Thought…

Complex opportunities and problems often demand multi-faceted solutions. Processing the multi-dimensional options in order to arrive at a final solution will challenge even the most experienced decision-maker. Documenting each option and its associated required, important, and nice-to-have characteristic values aids in the evaluation and selection process as well as providing a record from which to communicate the decision, evaluate its implementation progress, and assess its ultimate outcomes for lessons learned.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”49206, 25542, 25653″]


Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.

Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library

Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually).

Not sure? Click here to learn more.

Buy the Article

Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Decision-Making – Evaluating Decision Options, part 2 of 3 for just $2!

[/wcm_nonmember]

StrategyDriven Diversity and Inclusion Forum

“Diversity and inclusion exists when members of an organization act in a manner that recognizes and respects individual similarities and differences such that employees feel they and their work are valued and meaningfully contribute to the mission of the organization.”

StrategyDriven Contributors

Remaining relevant in today’s hyper-competitive business environment requires the full engagement of an organization’s workforce and the retention of highly talented employees. To accomplish this, leaders must capture the passion and commitment of subordinates by providing them with work that has a meaningful impactful on others and is quantifiablely measurable and rewarded; all while connecting with them on a personal level. Similarly, individuals need to connect with their peers in a way that makes them feel their contributions meaningfully add to the team and the organization’s overall success. Simply put, individuals seek to be valuable to and valued by their organizations; limited only by their abilities and desires. Without this sense of value and connectedness, a job becomes nothing more than the means to a paycheck, productivity declines toward that which is required to maintain employment, and attrition rises as employees seek more fulfilling work; all at great cost to the organization.


Gallup researchers found that within the average organization:

  • 29 percent of employees are engaged; working with passion and feeling connected to their company
  • 56 percent of employees are not engaged; putting in time but not energy or passion into their work
  • 15 percent of employees are actively disengaged; acting out their unhappiness and undermining the accomplishments of engaged employees

This research also showed that engaged employees are more productive, profitable, safer, create stronger customer relationships, and stay longer with their company than less engaged employees.

Source: Gallup Study: Engaged Employees Inspire Company Innovation, Gallup Management Journal, October 2006

Increasing workforce diversification challenges all members of an organization attempting to satisfy the individual value proposition. Differences in age, race, gender, religion, and sexual orientation to name but only a few, influence what makes individuals feel valued. Studies have shown the degree to which an individual feels valued by his/her superiors and peers in large part defines his/her work engagement and the subsequent value offered to the organization. Thus, the challenge is a circular one best solved by fostering an organizational culture that respects and embraces diversity and inclusion.

Focus of the Diversity and Inclusion Forum

While there exists a natural association between diversity and inclusion and organizational accountability, this forum will focus on the principles, best practices, and warning flags associated with establishing and maintaining a workplace environment that respects and values individual differences in order to earn full employee engagement and commitment to the achievement of the organization’s goals. The following articles, podcasts, documents, and resources cover those topics critical to enhancing workplace diversity and inclusion.

For additional information on creating a positive, motivating workplace environment, visit the StrategyDriven Employee Engagement Center of Excellence.

Articles

Principles

Best Practices

Warning Flags

StrategyDriven Expert Contributor Articles

StrategyDriven Podcasts

StrategyDriven Podcast – Video Edition

StrategyDriven Podcast – Special Edition

Documents

Tools and Templates

Resources

Books

Reports

Training Courses

StrategyDriven Podcast Episode 4 – Prioritize the Mission, part 2 of 2

StrategyDriven Podcasts focus on the tools and techniques executives and managers can use to improve their organization’s alignment and accountability to ultimately achieve superior results. These podcasts elaborate on the best practice and warning flag articles on the StrategyDriven website.

Episode 4 – Prioritize the Mission, part 2 of 2 elaborates on Strategic Planning Best Practice 2 – Prioritize the Mission. This discussion concludes the Prioritize the Mission series by examining in detail the quantitative and qualitative methods to differentiate important mission-based goals.
[powerpress]


About the Contributor

Nathan Ives, StrategyDriven Principal is a StrategyDriven Principal, and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.