Although the
concepts of performance measurement and performance
management have existed for many years, there is increasing
demand that agencies begin to transform their organizations
to institutionalize these practices. This pressure
is the result of the convergence of two forces:
(1)
increased demand for accountability on the part of
governing bodies, the media, and the public in general
(2)
a mounting commitment of managers and government
agencies to focus on results and work more deliberately
to strengthen performance.1
|
This article was published
in the Winter
2006 issue
of Perspectives.
Please refer to our Terms
of Use policy regarding acceptable
use of content on the ICF International Web
site. |
|
Strictly speaking, an organization's performance goals
can only be achieved through its employees. An effective
performance measurement and management system links individual
and teamwork behaviors to the organization's business
strategies, goals, and values. For an organization to achieve
its goals, it is essential for each employee to understand
individual roles and responsibilities for goal achievement,
and there must be continuous dialogue between leaders and
employees to set performance expectations, monitor progress,
and evaluate results. Together, leadership and staff work
to plan, measure and analyze, and manage performance—three
essential action steps that are interlinked and ongoing in
an organizational culture that successfully measure and account
for performance, as shown in the model below.
During the performance planning phase, the first phase of
performance measurement, the organizational business strategy—including
its mission, vision and objectives, and specific outcomes
required to achieve the overall strategy—is defined.
Goals and plans for how to measure achievement must be identified
In this step, outputs and measures are defined, and requisite
data collection and analysis processes and procedures are
developed and implemented. Additionally—and most importantly—employees
come to understand their individual roles and responsibilities
with respect to performance measurement and are given the
fundamental information, resources, competencies, and motivation
to ensure their successful execution.
In the second phase
of the performance measurement process—the
measurement and analysis phase—data that informs areas
of success and challenge for the organization are collected
and analyzed. Specific elements and factors that contribute
to successes or challenges along with new and/or modified
information needs and lessons learned are identified.
Once performance
data has been collected and analyzed, it must be effectively
managed. The third phase of the process—performance
management—is the phase in which solutions to address
identified challenges are developed and implemented, along
with mechanisms to ensure the continuation of program or
organizational successes. Additionally, performance measurement
systems and processes may be modified as needed to ensure
that information collected through the performance measurement
process is timely, relevant, and sufficient—steps that
cycle back to performance planning. Unfortunately, many agencies
have not moved beyond collecting performance data to utilizing
this data to proactively manage the agency. According to
the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), federal
managers reported having more performance measures in 2003
than in 1997, but they also reported that use of performance
data for program management activities has essentially remained
unchanged.2
While there are several commonly used methodologies
for performance measurement (e.g., balanced scorecard, logic
model) within a particular human resource organization, the
specific techniques are frequently a function of a number
of contextual factors—some
of which are under the control of human resource managers,
and some of which are not. Regardless of the particular methodology
used, however, success in obtaining meaningful performance
data and using this data to manage, and institutionalizing
these practices so that they become ingrained in the organization
depends on several factors. The first is the presence of
a culture of accountability within the organization—that
is, a transformation of the organizational culture to promote
understanding and support for the organizational mission,
as well as for increased accountability and enhanced decision-making.
In a culture of accountability, leadership demonstrates commitment
to managing for results. In turn, staff engages and invests
in the process, which leads to feelings of empowerment and
continuity.
Before implementing a performance measurement
or management system, conduct background work to see if other
pieces of your agency have implemented their own system.
You may be able to begin working with them to align goals,
and they may have lessons learned about performance management
in your agency, including what features may make the system
most user-friendly in your organization. Next, anticipate
and consider the unintended consequences of measuring performance.
Reinforced behavior will be repeated, so carefully consider
what behaviors should be emphasized (e.g., individual achievements
versus team achievements). Finally, communication of performance
information among relevant stakeholders is crucial to the
success of any performance measurement or management system.
While performance measurement is beginning to become more
common, very few agencies are actively involved in using
that data to proactively manage. In other words, performance
measurement has not yet become performance management. Careful
planning, consistent implementation and communication, and
working towards a culture of accountability will help move
an organization beyond performance data collection to effective
performance management.
Learn more about ICF International's performance
management solutions and capabilities in organizational
development and transformation.
1Poister, T.H. Measuring Performance
in Public and Nonprofit Organizations. San Francisco,
CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2003.
2U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Managing
for Results:
Enhancing Agency Use of Performance Information for Management
Decision-Making (GAO-05-927). Washington, DC, 2005.
|
