Go Back
  • Hail to the Chief Performance Officer!

    NK CPO 

    Wow, what a week! On January 7, President-elect Barack Obama appointed Nancy Killefer as the country’s first chief performance officer. It actually caught me by surprise. Typically we think innovation stems from the private sector and over time is accepted by the public sector. In this case we see the public sector taking the lead in an area that the private sector has been slow to accept.

    You hear a lot these days about the bad economy. You also hear about companies going into a bunker mentality and hoping to survive rather than proactively managing the situation. Harvard Business Review benchmarked both approaches, and the results clearly favored companies that were proactive in their approach to managing through tough economic conditions.

    The bottom line is that you cannot position your company for success if you don’t have a plan that is comprehensive and flexible, and that highlights the gaps in your budget as well as the reserves you have available. Performance management provides the catalyst for implementing such a process and gives you the ability to turn economic crisis into an opportunity, so your business can thrive.

    Hopefully, the appointment of Nancy Killefer will have a number benefits:

    · It should supercharge and excite those companies currently implementing a performance management process

    · It should get the attention of companies considering implementing a performance management solution and serve as a wake-up call for those who don’t have performance management on their radar

    · It should shake things up and formalize the performance management title/position for all government agencies (just think of the potential!)

    For those who are new to the notion of a chief performance management office or officer, author Bob Paladino defines it in his book, "Five Key Principles of Corporate Performance Management." Included are case studies, key principles and best practices that provide a recipe for successful transformation into a continuous planning environment to create a strategically managed company. And the first step is putting someone in charge:

    "The CPM [Corporate Performance Management] Office and Officer are at the center of the five CPM principles. Establishment of this office must be your enterprise’s first step toward formalizing CPM competencies in your organization." — Bob Paladino

    If you are interested in learning more, please check out our book offer.

    Full story

    Comments (0)

  • The Art of Scorecarding

    Scorecarding 

    The Art of Scorecarding

    I just completed reading a book on Microsoft’s Performance Point Server and was surprised, not by the features and functionality of Performance Point, but how the author treated the subject of scorecards and balanced scorecards. It seems everyone has their own definition of scorecards, and they cover the spectrum from visual representation of data to complex GUI interfaces that show cool dials and graphs.

    Sadly, most definitions miss the point. The term “Scorecards” originated with the Kaplan and Norton’s definition of the balanced scorecard and was meant to create a strategic method of management. Scorecard software, for its part, is intended to encapsulate a company’s strategic plan and allow operations to be measured against it.

    In this way, the scorecard considers information not from the bottom up, with an “in all this data there must be a pony some where” perspective, but from the top down. In other words, What is strategic to our business and can we measure it from the highest levels through the lowest levels of detail to support decisions and action plans? The author of the Performance Point Server book treated scoring and weighting as an optional activity. Of course, scoring and weighting is the only way to effectively measure what seem to be obtuse strategic objectives.

    It always amazes me that the balanced scorecard methodology—or any scorecarding methodology, for that matter—hasn’t taken hold in more companies. The balanced scorecard methodology has been around about 15 years, and companies implementing balanced scorecards have produced dramatic turnarounds.

    The common refrains that “finance handles that (the finances of the business )” or “that is done in accounting,” would seem to suggest that financial management is a black art or something of magic. Scorecards help put these myths to bed by pulling back the wizard’s curtain to reveal critical business data that is specific to authorized executives, managers and departments, in a format which is graphical and makes clear the relationship between content. In effect, scorecards makes visible the results of all the “accounting” being performed in the organization and even step beyond what is typically thought of as accounting to include operational metrics.

    Maybe companies that have successfully implemented scorecards as a strategic method of management understand the benefits and want to keep it a secret, but if I was hired as a new CFO of a company, the first area I would address to “make my mark” would be scorecards. I would not wait for the “perfect set of Key Performance Indicators,” but would start with the “perceived” key metrics or what I’m currently highlighting in management review meetings, and work as a facilitator to evolve the scorecarding process to a strategic method of management.

    Full story

    Comments (0)

  • Is Your Decision-Making Like Sausage Making?

    Is Your Decision-Making Like Sausage-Making?

    In many organizations, making decisions is like making sausage. There is little visibility of what goes into them and outcomes may surprise you – not always pleasantly.

    Better decisions enable organizations to take advantage of market opportunities more quickly, respond to competitors more effectively, make course corrections earlier and react to changing economic conditions with greater agility.

    Conversely, poor decisions are costly. In this fast-moving, knowledge-based global economy, more people in organizations are being asked to make decisions, and their decisions have a broader and more significant impact than ever before. Too much information with too little insight, an incomplete understanding of the full implications of our decisions and too little time for contingency planning adds to the pressure.Not surprisingly, in a recent nationwide survey of 664 corporate representatives covering finance departments’ highest priorities, 85 percent selected “improve decision-making” as the first or second priority and 60 percent selected it as the top priority. These finance leaders make it clear that merely improving visibility into organizational health is no longer sufficient.

    The good news is thanks to 50 years of scholarly research we now understand the limitations of using human judgment alone to make decisions. And through experience, we’ve learned that good decisions depend on delivering the right information to the right people soon enough to matter. With technology advances, we’ve never had better and more cost-effective tools for decision-making.

    The optimal time to improve decision-making has arrived.

    FULL STORY

    Full story

    Comments (0)