Three Groups at Boeing Zero in on Performance Measurement (published by National Productivity Review, Spring 1994)
The Blossoming of Melissa (published by Roots and Wings Adoption Magazine, Jan/Feb/Mar 1996)
Learning to Walk the Leadership Talk? (published by Healthcare Executive Mar/Apr 1994)
Using Leadership Criteria to Measure and Reward Performance (published by Physician Executive, Aug 1995)
Practice what you Preach (published by Best Practice, "Measuring Performance" Issue, IFS International Lmt, UK)
Integrating Processes and Performance: Benchmarks and Keys to Quality (published by Performance & Instruction, Sept 1993) ...and 19 more Integrating Processes and Performance: Benchmarks and Keys to Quality
(by JT Carr, published by Performance & Instruction, Sept 1993) William Sandy (1991), Chairman and CEO of Sandy Corporation, writes of "organization charts that vaguely define roles, overlapping charters with more than one person accountable, too many decision makers, rewards not commensurate with risks, praise for activity rather than results, innovation without special nurturing..." He continues," ...when major changes don't happen, frequently it's because people don't know why/what is expected, nor how to do it, nor do they believe the effort is worth the gain." The answer to William Sandy's situation lies in the integration of two key areas: 1. Understanding the processes and their application 2. Measuring and rewarding the right performance Let's examine each of these key areas. Key #1: Understanding The Processes and their Application Much of what William Sandy is referencing are issues relating to: * The Life Cycle Process * The Planning and Managing Process, and * The Writing Process Each process has a specific set of steps and logical methodology. Each step results in a written document that can be used as a tool in planning and communicating. These processes, used in aerospace and defense, might very well be used as benchmarks for planning, designing, developing, and implementing anything. Understanding the Planning and Managing Process The process of planning and managing (monitoring) the work is an existing and effective process used in aerospace and defense. There are specific steps to this process and it is integrated with the Life Cycle Process. Every time some work is to begin or an assignment is given to anyone, the planning and monitoring process begins. The process already exists and is defined. Perhaps some tailoring might be necessary. The Planning and Managing Process is used by managers and self-empowered teams--all people--whenever planning is needed. Statement of Work The Statement of Work should be the first document that is constructed. It is the who, what, when, where, why and how (in big picture terms) for the team. It is the communication tool that serves to inform people: - why they are there (purpose) - what needs to be done (work to be done) - names/function of team members (responsibility) - major milestones (target dates), and - other information about the endeavor. It serves to inform people, clarify the reason for being together, and aids communication. Later, the Statement of Work can be expanded to include evaluation criteria the customer plans to use to assure his or her needs are met. An informed team is able to contribute more effectively at the outset because of this document. A draft document is recommended when details are sketchy. Situation: During the beginning of a facility relocation project at a major aerospace firm, team members on the project had limited understanding of the project and were unclear about details of work to be done and team member responsibilities. Solution: A Statement of Work (or project description document) was developed and used as a discussion document during the kickoff meeting to introduce to the team members the major details of the project. This document increased common understanding and minimized misunderstanding of the project team. Team Organization Chart A simple organization chart, arranged by project team functions, served to explain the functions of the team members, including the customer rep, and the reporting hierarchy for that particular project. Work Breakdown Structure The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is a systematic way to break the work to be done into a logical structure. This tool is frequently misunderstood and poorly constructed. It is an extremely important key to planning and controlling the endeavor. Keys such as: - identifying all the work to be done in terms of products or deliverables - following some rules of proper WBS logic and structure, and - defining terms as in a WBS dictionary ... provide balance, order, and control for the manager. Situation: Past WBSs were reviewed by the team and lessons learned were applied. During past projects, the WBS detail was quite extensive and in certain sections, the logic used to create the WBS was unclear. After the WBS had been constructed, some confusion by the team continued to exist regarding the meaning of terms and specific work included in the WBS. Solution: The WBS and WBS Dictionary were developed by the team during a working session. The project team recommended that: - the team collectively be involved in constructing the WBS to the appropriate level, and - caution be used in not tracking too much detail. Responsibility Matrix The Responsibility Matrix tracks who is responsible for what in the endeavor, and who should give what data to whom. It is an integration control document of the utmost importance in managing the complexities of multi-functional teams. It compares the work to be performed with the Project Team's functional structure. Situation: Confusion existed as to who had primary responsibility for what work.Team members were unclear as to who was responsible for providing input to whom on what tasks. Solution: A Responsibility Matrix was developed and agreed to by the team members. This matrix provided guidance throughout the project's duration as to what individual (s) and/or organization (s) had primary responsibility for assuring that the work was performed. This document also identified which individuals were responsible for submitting their input to the primary focus in order to assure that all appropriate input had been obtained. Schedules The scheduling function has its own set of steps. Identifying the work is one function and should be differentiated from scheduling the work, which is a different and separate, but clearly related, function. The two should not be confused. Managers need to: 1. Understand the work (Statement of Work) 2. Develop a functional organization chart (Project Org Chart by function) 3. Define the work (Work Breakdown Structure) 4. Assign responsibility (Responsibility Matrix if much interfacing activity is necessary) 5. Develop the schedules (Scheduling) 6. Establish controls (Visibility walls/rooms, reviews) to assure that the assignment is on track. The first five steps provide measurable benchmarks against which to determine planning excellence. The sixth step measures and tracks performance in the managing aspect of the planning and managing function. Understanding the Life Cycle Process Simply stated, the big picture of the Life Cycle Process could be defined as: - Define - Design - Develop, and - Deliver The Planning and Managing Process is part of the Life Cycle Process and includes many of the activities associated with its Define stage. Key to the success of the Life Cycle Process is understanding the various reviews and tests that occur repeatedly throughout the phases of the process. The customer's role in the review process assures that customer needs and requirements are being met during the development and completion of each phase. Understanding the Writing Process Since much of the planning and managing function is writing, it is imperative for managers to understand that: - Writing is a process. - Its outcome is a document (something written). - The document must be planned and controlled. - The document has a life cycle whose development phases must be defined, designed, developed, and delivered. Note that the processes repeat themselves and are continually integrated. Various authors support this approach. Edmond Weiss (1982) suggests strategic planning for documents and offers a structured method for planning, writing, and revising in less time and with greater results. James Souther and Myron White (1984) from the University of Washington in Seattle urge that writers follow a structured design approach in technical writing. Result If people have an opportunity to understand these standard processes, develop planning documents, and use this proven approach, then the result will be: - greater understanding and more effective communication, - increased staff and team efficiency, and - improvements in planning and managing. Written standards and procedures assure that planning and managing endeavors are uniform. Untangling the process of building a product or service (life cycle) from the process of planning and managing the work (program management or planning and controls) would provide managers with a better understanding of how to plan and monitor their mission or assignment. Further, it might also enlighten and clarify how planning fits into the bigger product/service picture. Key#2: Measuring and Rewarding The Right Performance Understanding structure and processes are only part of the answer. Measuring and rewarding the right type of performance are keys to quality action and results. A performance management [approach] that discourages bureaucracy, empire building, and cronyism, and measures and rewards people for Productivity, Entrepreneurship, and Teamwork should be used. Three criteria, [introduced] by Michael LeBoeuf (1985) to measure and reward performance include: 1. Productivity, [includes] streamlining, and simplicity 2. Entrepreneurship, [includes] creativity and innovation 3. Teamwork [includes] loyalty The following scenario illustrates what can be accomplished using these criteria. A newly appointed supervisor for the Learning Center at an aerospace firm, with her staff, wanted to make customer service improvements and changes. These improvements became their goals. However, they had to work within the following constraints [requirements]: - Use existing resources - No overtime was allowed. - No extra staff or purchasing funds were available. - Little to no training budget was available. Within these constraints, the following actions and results are summarized. Planning and Managing Structure Each of the administrators at the three existing learning center sites was asked to complete a functional organization chart, listing all the functions performed at that location and the one person responsible. This chart was submitted in writing and shared with all other learning centers. In this way, staff and management knew who was responsible for what at which site. Productivity, Communication, and Leadership Productivity tools, such as mind mapping were taught to the staff and used by the supervisor. Simplicity and streamlining were applauded. Team and group staff meetings and simple but informative newsletters were initiated to improve communication as team goals were initiated. A new position of Learning Center Coordinator was created, the function of which was to be a communication liaison between the supervisor and the other Learning Center administrators and headquarters staff. Staffer "A" was selected primarily because she was especially strong in streamlining efforts, simplifying work and procedures, and would be a good role model for her administrator colleagues at Learning Centers at other locations. This proved to be excellent strategy. Performance and Rewards Functional teams identified internal and external customer service goals. Staff was slow to initiate results. Something was still missing. That missing ingredient was a motivation or performance and reward system. The solution was found using LeBoeuf's flexible performance criteria which measures [rewards] people on: - productivity (streamlining, simplicity and resourcefulness) - entrepreneurship (creativity, innovation, and risk taking), - teamwork (loyalty and working together) LeBoeuf's ten rewards are varied, flexible, and can meet most needs: 1. Money 2. Recognition 3. Time off 4. Piece of the action 5. Favorite work 6. Advancement 7. Freedom 8. Personal growth 9. Fun 10. Prizes The criteria applied to both manager/supervisor and staff. For rewards, the staff each selected three rewards in priority, remaining flexible where possible and limited only by company standards and procedures. Significant and Impressive Results in Weeks! Results were impressive and exciting. Numerous achievements results within weeks when the performance criteria were applied to each staff member. Staff members were pleased with the criteria against which they were to be measured. When staff saw the supervisor "walking the walk" and measuring herself against this same criteria, they followed in like manner. Some specific results achieved by integrating productivity, entrepreneurship, and teamwork included: - Installing an automated registration system in one month when others said it couldn't be done in less than five years. An existing company training registration system was modified and installed in three sites after pilot testing. (productivity/creativity) - Installing text and graphics software that had been stored and forgotten in a locked basement closet. (productivity) - Configuring the software to look the same at each of the sites, so that staff could work at any site and use standard procedures to get online. (streamlining) - Having staff teach each other to work on the software (teamwork) - Simplifying the ordering and receipt of materials by working and negotiating with suppliers, simplifying and clarifying the ordering, and including the type of information that made it easier for suppliers to respond. Materials were received within 2-3 days or ordering instead of 5 weeks. (simplification) - Using a standard order form that was flexible for "exceptions", and contained complete, and proper information needed by the supplier. Orders were faxed rather than mailed. Problems in filling the orders were communicated by fax as well, thus speeding up the whole process. (streamlining, productivity) - Using successful marketing techniques (i.e. discontinued and old training materials were sold at discounted, "reduced for quick sale" prices). (creativity) - Standardizing procedures, yet allowing each center to remain flexible so that customers could see similarity among the sites yet maintain their site individuality to meet customer needs. (streamlining/creativity) Reward Individuals for Teamwork Ad hoc working sessions by members of the same function assisted in identifying similar, common problems, streamlining work efforts, and achieving standardization among different sites. Monthly briefing sessions with administrators served to: - surface and resolve problems, - provide a forum for management guidelines and assignments, and - receive news of events of interest to share at their individual sites. Individuals were rewarded for working as a team. Reward and Integrate Fun with Performance Gatherings with all staff in attendance provided more thorough communication among the staff. Fun, early settings such as informal dinner meetings helped to relax people, reduce conflict, integrate serious topics, and achieve results. Reducing conflict by encouraging fellowship in a fun atmosphere was the first stage in the process of negotiating. Conflict was reduced. More achievements occurred. Results These success were short-lived, however. LeBoeuf's criteria were not used to measure and reward other managers' performance. Fear of loss of control and power were strongly felt by senior management. The supervisor was considered a troublemaker [emphasis added], moved to a different department, and placed on probation. In a new role as Supervisor of Administrative Services, and while on probation, with staff reduced to one, the supervisor achieved the following improvements, all of which are based on standard methods and processes: - Training schedules: Simplified the training schedules, eliminated abbreviations to improve clarity and communication, reduced schedules to one format, used an easier graphics software tool, prepared schedules in under one hour instead of two days, and surfaced numerous existing training and meeting rooms that were available for use and previously were unused. This eliminated the problem of double-booking the same room at the same time. (simplicity/productivity) - Telephone/fax/pager orders and installations:Installed voice mail, denied duplicate requests for pagers and answering machines, and found better uses for existing resources. Disallowed special requests with no justification for expensive phone service that was reserved for senior staff according to company standards. (productivity) - Offered free training on existing telephone features so that customers could obtain more value and use from existing resources. (productivity) - Simplified the ordering of telephones and fax machines by negotiating with the various telephone companies and agreeing to use simple, clear English on orders, not "telephonese". (productivity) - Discontinued telephone service not used for several months. (productivity) - Capital Inventory: Conducted physical inventory of hundreds of capital equipment items located at different sites in two days.
(creativity/productivity) - Designed an inventory report of thousands of inventoried items, using MS Word and a matrix format. (creativity) - Used the search feature on MS Word to search for a particular item or assigned manager. (creativity/simplicity) - Identified and located many items that previously were considered lost or sent to "surplus". (productivity) - Suggestion system: Developed a suggestion tracking system using MS Word; used the search feature to search for a particular suggestion or to locate the assigned manager. (creativity/simplicity) Risks In Achieving Success Paperwork work was reduced, non-essential administrative functions were eliminated, effort was decreased, procedures were streamlined, and work was made easier. However, upper-level and mid-level managers became uncomfortable. Managers were not interested in streamlining work, decreasing paperwork and staff, and being productive. They saw improvements in quality as threatening to their power. "Today, managerial power is measured by the size of the staff, the amount of paper shuffled, and the resources and budget used," says LeBoeuf. Successful improvements label people as troublemakers and cause "career death", according to Robert Kuhn (1989). Gamache and Kuhn (1989) cite several creativity stoppers, including barriers of inertia, attitude, the fear of failure, and comfort in the known: "...you get coveted promotions by maintaining a low profile and staying the course for many years; otherwise you will haunt the corporate halls along with others who have tried, failed, and suffered career death. So many executives believe that inaction is safer than action, mistakes kill careers, and low profile, riskless performance garners rewards." In spite of the supervisor's accomplishments, she was still considered a troublemaker, found to have shown no improvement in behavior, and terminated. The reason for the termination was given as "non-productive". This action of terminating creative management continues today.
Leaders Must Set the Example
Processes and performance criteria such as simplicity and teamwork have little meaning until leaders begin to practice what they preach. Productivity is not well understood; streamlining and simplicity are not commonly practiced. Further, they are in conflict with current measures of power and performance. Dr. Ghanzanfer Bozai (1991) of the University of Oklahoma states: "Heroes personify the values of an organization...Heroes reinforce the basic values of a culture by making success attainable and human, providing role models, symbolizing the company to the outside world, preserving what makes the company special, setting the standard of performance, and motivating employees." He warns against pitfalls during cultural change: "The change should be reflected in deed and not in words alone. The way to prevent lip service is to get people to participate. Cynicism occurs when people see no link between the actions of management and the values they are trying to preach. It makes them believe that management is telling them, 'Don't do what we do, do what we say..." Changing culture is not an easy task... '" Lewis Lehr (1988), former Chairman and CEO of 3M Corporation, states, "I am tempted to say that innovation at 3 M works in spite of top management." Top managers need to: - Learn resourcefulness and practice streamlining and simplicity. (productivity) - Think in new terms (i.e., use existing resources differently) (innovation/creativity) - Work together better, sharing information and procedures with staff, colleagues and customers (teamwork) - Be rewarded for this type of productive thinking, behavior, and practice. The greatest need is that top managers: - Must understand the various existing [management] processes...and their application, integration, and impact on quality. - Must have a performance management system that rewards people for productivity, teamwork and entrepreneurship. - Must practice what they preach. Behavior modeling, ethics, values, and leadership skills must be strengthened. Measures of power such as large staff and budgets do not support streamlining and being resourceful, and erode morale. When there is a performance management system in place that rewards top managers for entrepreneurship, teamwork and productivity, and managers exemplify this in their own personal practice, companies will surely succeed. Only then will America's economy improve.## References Bozai, G.. (1991). Managing a Cultural Change Project. PMI Proceedings, p.382. Technical Symposium, Dallas, Tx. Gamache, R.D.7 Kuhn,R.L. (1989). The Creativity Infusion. p.4 NY: Ballinger. Kuhn, R.L. (Editor-in-Chief) (1988). Handbook for creative and innovative managers, p.82. New York: McGraw Hill. LeBoeuf, M. (1985). Greatest management principle. New York: Berkley Books. Sandy, W. (1991, September-October). Avoiding the breakdown between planning and implementation. Journal of Business Strategy 12 (5), p.30-33. Souther, J. & White, J. (1984). Technical report writing. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Co. Weiss, E. (1982). The writing system for engineers and scientists. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. About the Author JT Carr, President of Structured Methods Applications Co., former instructor and supervisor with Boeing, is a researcher, author, educator, and pharmacist, based in Bellevue, WA. She specializes in integrating tools and methods in planning, productivity, and performance. She was Aerospace/Defense Track Chair for the 1992 PROJEXPO in San Jose and for PMI's 1991 Symposium in Dallas. Address: 5929 149th Ave SE, Bellevue, WA
Tel: 425-643-6136 or 1-800-601-6888
|
