Tactical Execution Warning Flag 1 – Incomplete Staff Work
“The job is not done until the paperwork is signed.”
StrategyDriven Contributors
All too often, documentation of job performance is trivialized, viewed as an unimportant impediment to progress and is either not completed or not completed well. What goes unrecognized is the impact this documentation has on performance improvement, equipment reliability, and financial accounting; all of which affect a company’s bottom line.
Completed staff work or paper closure is as integral to job completion as task performance itself. Staff work includes all documentation associated with the job’s performance including:
- status reports
- time and expense reports
- operations and maintenance records (as found and as left conditions, materials consumed, tools used, actions taken, meter readings, causal codes, etcetera)
- condition/problem and cause evaluation reports
- management observation forms
Staff work completion only occurs when the required data is recorded in such a way so as to support performance of the next process step. For most organizations, this means data is either entered into a computer system or hard copy forms are filled out and appropriately filed.
Data quality and its entry or documentation accuracy are critically important, for without these, downstream processes are corrupted. Inaccurate date flowing to downstream processes necessarily creates an inaccurate representation of circumstances upon which leaders make decisions and/or procedural follow-on activities are driven. This problem’s frequent occurrence yielded the modern cliche ‘garbage in, garbage out‘. It is important to remember that no data can be equally, if not more, misrepresenting of actual circumstances than bad data. Subsequently, incomplete staff work, the absence of documentation, represents ‘garbage in‘ and more often than not results in ‘garbage out.’
Incomplete staff work is a result of deficient processes and/or systems or the way in which the process is reinforced and executed. 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 recognize whether their organization’s staff work is being completed in a proper and timely manner. Only after a problem is recognized and its causes identified can the needed action be taken to move the organization toward improved performance.
Process-Based Warning Flags
- work processes to not direct the completion of staff work
- computer systems, where applicable, do not reinforce complete data entry
- staff work completion expectations are not contained within management performance standards documents
- management observation programs do not contain provisions to review work documentation
- performance management systems do not contain criteria for assessing an individual’s staff work performance, particularly for non-administrative personnel
- no standard recurring self assessments exist to evaluate the impact of incomplete or inaccurate staff work on bottom line results
Process Execution Warning Flags – Behaviors
- supervisors and individual contributors resist performing staff work
- managers and supervisors do not reinforce the need for effective and efficient task documentation
- managers and supervisors routinely press for the continuation of field work activities over the performance of administrative work
- executives and managers do not demand that computer systems be upgraded or configured to reinforce complete and accurate data entry
- executives and managers to not request evaluation and control processes be used to assess the impact of incomplete or inaccurate staff work on bottom line results
Potential, Observable Results
- missing and incomplete data records
- inconsistent data records for like objects (equipment/tools, plant components, personnel, etcetera)
- inaccurate and/or late billing
- indiscriminate fluctuations in performance measures
- manual manipulation of system provided data during performance measure updates
Potential Causes
- field workers feel staff work is an administrative task that is beneath them to perform, often because while others can perform data gathering and recording activities few can perform the associated field work
- managers and supervisors do not recognize the business value or adverse impacts resulting from the data gathered and recorded by field workers and therefore view staff work as either unimportant or a wasteful expenditure of field workers’ time
- managers, supervisors, and workers do not recognize that those closest to the actual work are in the best position to accurately document work results and findings
- individuals are resistant to changes that require them to learn a different method for gathering and recording data
Final Thought…
Fundamentally, any time decision-makers are presented with an incomplete or inaccurate understanding of the state of their business or the business environment decision-making is impaired; diminishing their effectiveness in guiding the organization to its most optimal value creation.
The following list captures a few ways incomplete or inaccurate staff work can impact a company’s bottom line:
- a lack or incorrect documentation of personnel performance data forfeits the ability to accurately produce organizational behavior trend data; preventing analysis and implementation of optimized improvement initiatives to increase performance efficiency and reduce costs
- imprecise documentation of equipment operation and maintenance parameters can result in the performance of unnecessary maintenance or in the unexpected failure of under-maintained equipment; both of which result in unnecessary expenditure of the organization’s capital
- inaccurate time and expense or activity status reporting can result in errant billing; greatly reducing revenues if under-billing occurs or disgruntled and subsequently lost customers and the forfeiture of future revenue in the case of over-billing
StrategyDriven Podcast Special Edition 13 – An Interview with Michael Dunn, author of The Marketing Accountability Imperative
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.
- what marketing accountability is and how it benefits an organization
- three Horizons organizations go through in order to achieve marketing accountability
- landmines and enablers to achieving marketing accountability
- common marketing performance metrics used by accountable organizations
Additional Information
Complimenting the outstanding insights Michael shares in The Marketing Accountability Imperative
About the Author
Michael Dunn, author of The Marketing Accountability Imperative
[powerpress]
Leadership Inspirations – Inspiring Leadership
“Our chief want is someone who will inspire us to be what we know we could be.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
American essayist, philosopher, and poet
True leadership is inspirational; motivating individuals to become far more than what they currently are. Leadership is not about coordinating activities, setting deadlines, and reporting status; those activities are the work of managers.
Leadership is visionary, creating a picture of a better alternative tomorrow and then inspiring others to passionately seek that vision with a level of commitment that is often unexplainable. There are instances of this type of leadership all around us, the leadership provided by the brave men and women who in our moment of greatest need do the unimaginable to keep us safe from fire, flood, and those who would do us harm. There are also leaders like Matt Harding, who inspired thousands of people from around the world to join together in the fellowship of the dance to make the video “Where the hell is Matt?”.
Where the Hell is Matt? (2008) from Matthew Harding on Vimeo.
“Management creates order where there would otherwise be chaos. Leadership inspires the achievement of greatness.”
StrategyDriven Contributors
Management Observation Program Best Practice 3 – Use of Standard Observation Forms
In order to be fully effective, a management observation program must have credibility with those being observed and provide organizational performance improvement information. Credibility is established when those observed can expect both repeatable evaluations by one manager and consistent evaluations by different managers for a given job performance relative to established standards. Organizational performance improvement information is yielded when evaluation data from across the organization is aggregated; providing insights to the common patterns of desired and undesired employee behaviors.[wcm_restrict plans=”41901, 25542, 25653″]
Achievement of these four goals is most easily accomplished when standard data collection forms are used during the performance of management observations. Fundamentally, standard management observation forms are performance expectation checklists on which observation facts are recorded. These checklists drive consistency between observations because managers using them are provided with a preestablished list of items and standards against which the employee’s performance is judged. This consistency coupled with documentation of observation facts enables easy retrieval and aggregation of like data that can then be counted, trended, and analyzed to establish a picture of organizational performance.
While not an all inclusive list, effective management observations forms typically possess the following qualities:
- Expectations to be observed are consistent with documented and communicated performance standards
- Each expectation observable has a well documented and communicated graded performance range. A space is provided to document the grade for each observation area
(detailed grading criteria is often captured in a separate management observation process document) - Area for documentation of an overall activity performance grade and grade justification comments
- Space is allowed for the observer to document the specific behaviors witnessed
- Header space is available to document the activity observed, name of the observer, name of the individual observed, and the start and end time and date of the observation
- Signature lines exist for the observer and observed accompanied by a date and time
(the observed individual signs to acknowledge receiving the observation feedback) - Unique observation forms exist for various job types or standards adherence observations
- Listing of observables are logically grouped such as:
- By task: job preparation, job execution, job follow-up
- By performance standards: use of personnel safety techniques, use of personnel safety equipment, execution of personnel safety procedures
- Easily accessible, often available at the locations where the relevant work will occur
- Portable, often printed on pocket-sized note cards up to a single 8½ by 11 sheet of paper
- Rigid, printed on heavy weight paper or accompanied by clipboards for ease of use in the field
Final Thoughts…
While management observation of actual job performance is most effective, these observations can be extended to the finished or in progress deliverables of the workforce. In these instances, standard management observation forms provide a performance checklist for items such as the completeness and quality of staff work or the state of a job site. Note that is important these observations are followed up with feedback to the individual responsible for the work’s performance. These ‘non-activity’ type observations must adhere to all management observation conduct best practices to be fully effective.
Well documented management observations serve a dual purpose. Not only are they used to identify organizational performance trends but they provide managers with documentation of observed employee performance that can be used during routine feedback and coaching sessions and annual/semi-annual performance appraisal development.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”41901, 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 Management Observation Program Best Practice 3 – Use of Standard Observation Forms for just $2! [reveal_quick_checkout id=”41900″ checkout_text=”Access the Article Now!”] |
[/wcm_nonmember]
Project Management Best Practice 5 – Define Success First
Projects and the organizations supporting them share a key characteristic; they both deploy human, financial, and material resources to achieve defined goals. So like organizations, projects must have specific goals against which the project manager’s decisions and team member actions are focused. Like mission measures, results-based project goals should be defined before work begins and refined as scope and/or circumstances change. Only when this occurs can a project be effectively managed and efficiently completed.[wcm_restrict plans=”41104, 25542, 25653″]
‘Bring Me a Rock’ Projects
Shouldn’t a project’s specific goals and objects be defined within its scope document?
They should be. They frequently aren’t.
All too often a project’s scope document provides only general ‘pie-in-the-sky’ guidelines or targets for the project manager to meet. These vague project goals can be so non-specific that they could apply to almost any project; leaving so much up to individual presumption and judgment that decisions become difficult to evaluate and challenge. Under these circumstances, project managers tend to fall back on project performance measures, typically project cost and schedule adherence, to determine overall project success rather than the project’s resulting organizational impact.
Final Thought…
As amazing as this might sound, vague project goals have been applied to projects ranging from the thousands of dollars to the hundreds of millions of dollars to the billions of dollars. The lack of specific, time-bound project outcomes plagues project managers and their organizations not because a project is too small or too large for properly defined goals but because of insufficient planning discipline applied during the initiative’s formative stages. Thus, defining success first is a management best practice, not an administrative one. By exercising good management during the project scope definition process, the organization can avoid creating and discarding several undesirable rocks.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”41104, 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 Project Management Best Practice 5 – Define Success First for just $2! |
[/wcm_nonmember]