Accountability & Metrics
There is an old axiom that says “the best companies do not out-strategize, they out execute.” Crane agrees completely. This will not happen without accountability and metrics.
Accountability is intrinsic to the individual expressed through an eagerness to be responsible for progress. Internal satisfaction comes through making a difference.
Accountability cannot be sustained for positive effect from one person or entity over another. However, consequence can be imposed based on the existing hierarchy and power dynamics. While this may look like accountability in the short-term any positive results will not be sustained over time.
Developing a consulting engagement to improve performance and accountability, Crane says the following are the keys to success:
Make progress and problems visible. Establish key performance indicators with clearly defined targets. This includes operations – for each operating unit – and strategic execution. Caution – too many metrics is as bad as no metrics. A3 thinking is a great structure for this process.
Establish a process for performance review, reflection and escalation. This should be specific in terms of the cadence and individual responsibilities of the parties.
Metrics are the second key ingredient. Crane learned in his lean training that “if you cannot measure it, you do not have a problem.” Put another way, if we cannot measure our work we will not know if we are performing optimally, or if any change made is contributing to improvement. Accountable people want metrics. They want to see their progress and demonstrate it unequivocally.
In order for a metric to be useful, it has to have context. Trended performance, comparison to benchmarks, standards or predictive values all create context. Dashboards are tools that reflect our most important metrics within the most meaningful context.
Statistical process control is a very important technique when used with a run chart can separate meaningful improvement or erosion from common cause variation.