|
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: THE PERSONAL TOUCH |
| Jean-Baptiste Gabsy | 04.20.2007 | Any/All Industries | Corporate Growth |
|
 When Peter Drucker stated that firms must strike a balance in their operations by doing the right things and doing things right, what did he actually mean? When Kaplan & Norton created the “Balance Scorecard” concept, what were they suggesting the most? The answer revolves around a single fundamental factor: performance optimization. Yet, although there is a consensus for the need to achieve this crucial goal, there are deep differences among corporate pundits with regard to how to achieve such a goal. Management literature is full of approaches and recommended quick fixes. Young ambitious managers have a tendency to dwell on their financial software capabilities and how much of an “Excel whiz” one is or his/her mastery of “a battery of statistical programs and tools”. There is no doubt that analyzing financial data is of the utmost importance for any corporate concern. However, financial data pertain to a company’s past performance and any assumption that the present and future performances are a continuation of the past is simply speculative and misleading. It is true that you can’t manage what you can’t measure but it is also true that you can’t measure what you can’t define. This brings us to a pivotal question: who makes those determinations anyway? Who decides what courses of actions a company must undertake and what strategies must be espoused? The answer is simple yet revealing: people.
The workplace is a place where people spend the bulk of their time. It is where they earn a living and where they interact with others. They congregate in order to pull their respective strengths and skills towards achieving a common goal: perpetuate the firm’s life span and be part of its future. The question is: does it always work like this? Not really! Management theories varied and evolved over time. Corporate organizations and structures followed suit. So many attempts and recommendations were made to create the “perfect” or “ideal” or “most effective” framework of endeavor. This is illustrative of the endemic problems that exist within companies with regard to adapting to their ever-changing environment. Here again, the human factor plays a major role. Should management be proactive or reactive to these changes? How can one define “vision” and what does the concept of vision actually encompass? All depends on the strategic choices made by the decision-makers or “doing the right things” in the words of Peter Drucker. These choices are a reflection of the personality of the firm’s top honcho as well as his/her intrinsic beliefs.
Given this reality, what should a newcomer do upon completion of his/her “training” in his/her managerial appointment? Should this newcomer passively perform their assigned duties and avoid by all means to “upset” the establishment? It’s a fine line! If one’s top priority is job security and a “more manageable” position, such an attitude may be suitable. If, on the other hand, one is ambitious and wants to climb the corporate ladder, a different ball of wax is in order. The latter needs to interact with all members of the company at all levels. He/she needs to develop a full and comprehensive understanding of the intricate dimensions of the firm’s operations. This can only be achieved if the other members don’t feel “threatened” by the newcomer’s “probes” or suspect that the newcomer may be the top honcho’s “mole” trying to spy on them. To this end, one ought to have a great deal of tact and forge genuine friendships across the layers of the firm, particularly those at the bottom of the pyramid who generally know the firm’s basics better than anyone else.
Moreover, the ambitious newcomer must develop a full understanding of the industry in which his/her company operates. This requires networking with the various actors of the industry, and yes, including members of the competition. Networking will enable those who undertake it to explore and evaluate different approaches and strategies being used in the industry. It’s a de facto comparative study and analysis. In light of such an analysis, and using some benchmark ratios such as Market Penetration and ROI, one can determine which management methodology is the most efficient in that particular industry. This is crucial and fundamental in terms of recommending and making adjustments to the firm’s business strategies. It should also be a regular appraisal process not just an ad-hoc task. This approach has a name in management literature; it’s called the Delphi Method.
Once one amasses this wealth of knowledge, he/she will command the respect and appreciation of their peers in the firm and industry. During board meetings and forums, the ambitious manager should point out the shortcomings that he/she sees in the firm’s operations or strategic choices. The recommendations must be articulate, concrete, and backed by palpable and convincing evidence. The criticism must be constructive and conveyed formally and humbly. The idea is to persuade the ultimate decision-makers that the recommendations are made in good faith for the best interests of the firm and not to achieve personal gains. In other words, show them and convince them that you “really care” about the company and its future. Just like you didn’t want to be perceived by your colleagues as the big honcho’s “mole”, do your utmost to avoid alienating the honcho or patronizing him/her. It’s a sine qua non condition if you want your recommendations to be implemented and become an integral part of the company’s modus operandi.
What has been discussed above does not constitute in any way a short cut to success or a recipe that works under all circumstances. In fact, management is not an exact science and management issues are intricately linked to human psychology. One cannot assume that harmonious relationships can automatically be forged if certain specific steps and conditions are met. There is no such a roadmap. Nonetheless, there are some ways and specific courses of action that could increase one’s chances to succeed in his/her endeavor and have a personally satisfying career. One must not forget that all of us, as human beings, enter the workforce fundamentally as social actors and act and behave as such in the workplace. There are no buttons that we can push to tailor our demeanors and reactions. Furthermore, we are products of our respective cultures and, in today’s global economy, one must be very much aware of such a diversity and take it into account as a major factor inherent to any business undertakings. Likewise, interpersonal dealings within any business entity depend heavily on the human factor. Often, successes and failures occur due to human compatibility or lack thereof. To a very large extent, performance is affected by the personal touch. It is incumbent upon the individual to walk the walk of resilience, persistence, and abnegation if such an individual is eager to write his/her own success stories in his/her professional career.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
