Measurement

Tonight we begin wrapping up our discussion of the ADIA process (and the leadership model) with an examination of measurement.

Measurement is an essential  part of any strategy and a must for an effective organization.  In order to gauge our effectiveness we must measure and interpret data to determine whether our strategy is appropriate.  While there are few who would disagree with this premise, the devising and use of measures is intensely controversial.  Too often measurement is not realistic, does not reflect the actual state of affairs, and can drive strategy by taking on a life of its own—actions often pursue the goal of obtaining a better “score” in measurement than actually achieving an objective.  As strategists we must be extremely conscious of this fact; history is full of examples of us “winning” on paper right up to the moment of actual loss.

Management systems require a leader to do four things: Sense important data about internal and external environments, Convert that data into useful information, Translate that information into decisions, and Judge whether the feedback/measurement will ensure the desired outcome.  Organizations generally measure inputs, outputs (both are internal to the organization) and outcomes (external) in terms of effectiveness and efficiency.  Measurements usually come in three different types: natural measurements readily indicate status, Surrogate measurements are used in lieu of natural measurements, and Complex measurements are composed of several different types.  Regardless of the type being used, these measures should be unambiguous, comprehensive, direct, operational, and above all understandable.  This is, of course, in a perfect world.

When going through the readings in Mod 14 keep the above factors in mind, especially when reviewing the various officer performance reports given in the case study.  How are they different? Which in your view is most effective?  Do you have examples where measurements were effective in your organization—or not?

Module 15 introduces the concept of performance controls.  Performance controls are other means of control, focusing on the same basic question as measurements (“are we getting there”).  In “Control in an Age of Empowerment” Simons describes four “levers of control” that are used by leaders: diagnostic systems that measure progress by scanning for abnormal activity, Belief systems that control performance through inspiration, boundary systems that set limits on what ‘not’ to do, and interactive systems that permit leaders to inject themselves into the decision making process.  We’ll be looking at these systems and how they (and measurement in general) applies to the JFK case study.