Week 7 - Signature Assignment: Write and Analyze a Case Study and Week 8 - Assignment: Create a Brochure on Organizational Planning

Performance_and_Productivity_in_Public_and_Nonprof..._----_2._Major_Performance_Challenges.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >Week 7 - Signature Assignment: Write and Analyze a Case Study and Week 8 - Assignment: Create a Brochure on Organizational Planning

Major Performance Challenges

There are many opportunities for improvement. This chapter looks at some areas in which improvement has often been recognized and sought in recent years. Taken together, these efforts provide an overview of commonly pur- sued performance goals. Specifically, improvement opportunities are dis- cussed in the following four areas: (1) better serving external stakeholders’ needs, (2) improving organizational effectiveness and using resources effi- ciently, (3) improving project management, and (4) increasing productivity through people. Modern performance improvements efforts often raise the bar in these areas, and managers are increasingly expected to be familiar with the strategies and standards that they involve. These areas offer impor- tant opportunities for increasing performance and productivity (White and Newcomber 2005; Ammons 2004; Covey 1992; Herman 2004).

Performance improvement often begins with a diagnosis of things that the organization is not achieving, and which managers and others think it should. This is consistent with the strategic perspective of performance improvement discussed in the preceding chapter. A gap is experienced between expectations and reality—the promise or hope of what an orga- nization can do is not being met. Manifestations such as inefficient or shoddy service, cost overruns, low client satisfaction, failure to make key decisions—all indicate things are out of kilter, either a little or a lot. A disquiet or dissatisfaction exists about the status quo—something is not good enough. From this awareness of things not quite measuring up (some- thing is seen as “way too much” or “much too little”) begins the search for underlying problems, which eventually leads to the adoption of new goals, and the development of processes to help the organization move toward a more desirable state (Bardach 2000). Performance goals express the gap between what organizations experience, often undesired, and what they think they would like to experience.

Berman, Evan M.. Performance and Productivity in Public and Nonprofit Organizations, Taylor & Francis Group, 2006. ProQuest Ebook Central, http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/ncent-ebooks/detail.action?docID=1900024. Created from ncent-ebooks on 2021-10-26 19:07:21.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

24 CHAPTER 2

It is clear that goals imply, implicitly or explicitly, a standard or vision of how things could be. Client complaints are a problem only in the pres- ence of a standard or alternate future in which fewer clients complain; otherwise, they are just a statement of fact that people are complaining. Where there is no standard, there is no discussion about success or im- provement. However, performance goals should not only reflect what can or should be improved, but also a realistic assessment about what can be changed. This chapter focuses on the former, whereas chapter 3 consid- ers the reality of change in organizations that impose preferences or con- straints that managers must consider. This chapter sketches the lay of the land, whereas the next chapter examines strategies for making change happen successfully.

The overview of possible performance improvement opportunities pro- vided in this chapter can also be viewed as a list of problems of modern organizations. Where there exists an improvement opportunity, there also exists a problem. The tables in this chapter are designed as a checklist for possible performance problems. While there are many possible problems that organizations could address, most are able to work on only one or two major problems at a time. It takes time and dedication to make changes well and ensure that they are enduring. Thus, managers will want to select among those problems that appear most urgent for them.

Managers know well that performance problems are not always readily seen. What shows up as a low client satisfaction often is but a symptom of something else, such as a lack of information technology, uncaring em- ployees, or an outdated and deficient delivery process. Symptoms of prob- lems are also sometimes covered up—managers seldom want others to know that their unit experiences cost overruns or complaining clients. Reasons are given why problems or symptoms do not exist as such, but rather as “understandable phenomena” in the light of circumstances. All organiza- tions experience the challenge of openness versus obfuscation to a greater or lesser extent. If we are to make improvements, then we need to look beyond the stories and excuses to the facts as they exist. We need to be willing to look deeply and honestly into how things are functioning. Is the lack of employee motivation a manifestation of something deeper, such as too much red tape? This chapter is more than an inventory of modern per- formance challenges; it is also an invitation to think more deeply about what is really going on inside your organization. It is an opportunity to get to the fundamental root causes of your organization’s functioning. To that end, it also identifies symptoms that may point toward performance prob- lems, and it concludes with thoughts on the process of problem diagnosis in performance improvement.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 25

Stakeholders

In recent years, organizations are increasingly viewed as “open systems” that thrive through exchanges with their environment: organizations must satisfy the needs of their stakeholders: clients, citizens, elected officials, and community leaders. When the needs of these stakeholders are met, organiza- tions benefit from increased support for their missions. However, when their stakeholders’ needs are unmet, organizations suffer the consequences through democratic processes and the loss of clientele. Revenues and appropriations decline. Table 2.1 shows a range of major stakeholder problems, and varia- tions that may occur. Each of these implies improvement opportunity.

Attention to customer and stakeholder needs is a key legacy of the efforts to embrace Total Quality Management (TQM) and other customer-oriented strategies that have been emphasized in the public and nonprofit sectors since the early 1990s (Boyne 2002). Communities expect programs to be tailored to their needs. The standard is now increasingly that organizations identify their target groups or constituencies, and then develop programs to meet their needs (Problem 1). For example, parks departments must tailor their services to teenagers, single mothers, and retirees—they must know what each group’s needs are. These managers might be surprised that many retir- ees are as interested today in yoga and business development as they are in socializing and playing cards. Public safety departments must correctly as- sess the different needs and priorities of low-income populations and afflu- ent neighborhoods if they are to serve these populations well. Different neighborhoods do have different problems. Tax collectors’ offices must also serve people who are blind and those who do not speak English. Although public agencies typically cannot pick and choose their markets—they are chartered to serve the entire population—they need to correctly identify the needs of different groups. The challenge and opportunity is for managers to find new needs that they can meet.

This approach stands in sharp contrast with the one-size-fits-all men- talities of the past, whereby services are narrowly designed around their stated missions, irrespective of the needs of different groups and the im- pact of these services on community outcomes. For example, park depart- ments would provide facilities with little consideration for serving the needs of different age groups. They developed community resources that were to be used by those who wanted to. Police departments would provide an equal number of patrols to different neighborhoods, regardless of whether this served the needs of different neighborhoods. Today, such approaches are considered ineffective, outdated, and unacceptable. The bar has been raised. Agencies are assessed by the results they produce for their different

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

26 CHAPTER 2

Table 2.1

Major Performance Problems, Part 1

Major stakeholder problems Typical symptoms of major stakeholder problems: stakeholder complaints, stakeholder apathy, low levels of stakeholder satisfaction, stakeholders or community leaders ganging up on the organization.

Problem 1: Needs of target groups are not sufficiently met. Variations: Programs are absent or too small to meet target group needs, programs or policies perform poorly, client groups feel disenfranchised or excluded from decision-making processes, target groups have unrealistic expectations.

Problem 2: Individuals who interact with the agency are dissatisfied. Variations: Unresponsiveness by agency staff, poor mix of interaction mechanisms, inadequate frontline service.

Problem 3: Citizens, clients, or community leaders are apathetic about the program. Variations: Inadequate enthusiasm for new programs, inadequate support of agency goals and staff.

Problem 4: Individuals or groups are making politics at the expense of the organization.

Major organizational problems Typical symptoms of major organizational problems: infighting in units, turf battles across units, efforts that consistently sound right but fail to produce results, perceptions of having too many meetings and not doing enough work, spending too much time managing coordination across units, generating plans that gather dust, excessve budget requests, and demotivated employees.

Problem 5: The mission of the organization (or program) does not serve important society needs. Variations: The mission(s) has become outdated, failure to obtain new authority and mandates.

Problem 6: Missions are not being pursued. Variations: Lack of focus, inadequate program development, the organization as a rudderless ship, poor or inadequate resources (financial, technology/skills, people).

Problem 7: The organization or delivery technology is inefficient. Variations: Organization does not take advantage of economies of scale, delivery process has too many people or units involved, doing it all in-house, inefficient or ineffective use of information technology, delivery process is not informed by state of art practice, red tape.

Problem 8: Inadequate coordination. Variations: Coordination omits organizations or departments, coordination is shoddy or incomplete, coordination exists, but the outcome does not serve mission or stakeholder needs.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 27

client groups and communities. Nonprofit agencies have long been accus- tomed to the need for tailoring, but some do it much better than others, and grant-making agencies are increasingly raising the bar on accountability in this area, as well.

A challenge is to know which expectations communities and clients hold. Communities seldom speak with a single or even a clear voice, and they and their leaders also may make unrealistic and contradictory demands. Some residents measure performance by whether or not traffic jams disappear and if social services for infant children are provided for free—these are unreal- istic, fantastic expectations. Drivers like to drive their cars at speeds they think are safe, but as residents they prefer that all drivers adhere to far lower speed limits—these are contradictory expectations. Another challenge for leaders is to articulate a vision for the stakeholders and explain how their services fit within that vision. Organizations need to provide the right ser- vices that help their communities and clients move forward. Residents and community leaders may not realize the possibilities of the agency, but the agency would be remiss not to develop programs and policies that help them move forward. This conundrum of conflicting, interdependent, and underde- veloped interests requires open communication (King and Zanetti 2005). Managers need to identify and assess community needs by talking with com- munity leaders, and also by conducting focus groups, citizen surveys, and holding public hearings. Doing so helps to process and evaluate citizen ex- pectations, avoid citizens’ groups feeling disenfranchised, and helps raise and test new ideas. Through this dialogue, organizations are able to explain their policies as mindful of different interests and consistent with the broader interests of the community. Failure to gain workable community acceptance through these processes causes the credibility of organizations to suffer and complicates the job of the agency of meeting stakeholder needs. The im- provement opportunity is to find new, effective ways of involving commu- nity leaders and citizens.

Many agencies have significantly improved their customer service and responsiveness in recent years. This, too, is a legacy of TQM. No longer is frontline service in public and nonprofit organizations often synonymous

Problem 9: Communication is unclear, contradictory, or ignored. Variations: A lack of unitary command, contradictory demands, cultural and interpersonal differences cloud communication, communication is misinterpreted by the command structure.

Problem 10: Rewards do not support mission. Variations: Rewards or acknowledgement are absent or support other priorities, rewards or consequences encourage perverse behavior.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

28 CHAPTER 2

with long lines and uncaring employees (Problem 2). Expectations and per- formance have risen. High performing organizations set high standards for customer service and seek proactive ways to ensure high satisfaction, mak- ing even slight deviations a matter of internal import. They provide custom- ers with a broad range of convenient and technology-based ways to interact with them; they make their services customer-friendly and develop them with the customers’ needs in mind. Interactions with public and nonprofit organi- zations need not be an annoying and aggravating event—but in some organi- zations they still are. Phone calls are not returned, clients are given the runaround, environments are dirty and run down, employees are uncaring, and they offer clients fewer choices for interacting with them. In many orga- nizations, there is still ample room for improvement.

Providing customer service in the public sector has its unique issues, some of which are “red herrings.” Some public officials believe that customer ser- vice is more difficult in the public sector because some services are involuntary—such as getting a speeding ticket or being audited by the IRS. But saying “no” to customers is not unique to the public sector—private busi- nesses do it every day. Experience shows that tax inspectors and police officers can get high marks for their courtesy and respect, even while explaining in- fractions and penalty options. Inspectors can be friendly and helpful, or not. Employees do not have to be rude or uncaring; more can be done than merely citing this or that rule or policy. In short, customer service standards can be set for all interactions. Of course, many public service interactions do not involve the above scenarios, but rather straightforward information and service requests, such as asking information about one’s Social Security benefits.

Another problem is a lack of support by leadership networks and public apathy (Problem 3). Managing programs well does not automatically guar- antee a cadre of committed supporters, which are necessary to help see pub- lic organizations and their programs through inevitable periods of controversy, and nonprofit organizations through inevitable times of resource scarcity and the need for lobbying. Leadership and public support are invaluable assets that help programs grow and contribute to their communities; the improve- ment opportunity is to cultivate and maintain leadership support. Such sup- port can also deal with another problem, that of individuals or groups making politics at the expense of the agency (Problem 4). It is not uncommon for political candidates or political rivals to take shots at an agency, for example. When this occurs, managers must stand their ground, defending the achieve- ments and integrity of the organization. They must communicate the pride of the organization and it’s mission. Agencies and programs that fail to culti- vate stakeholder support experience a lack of community and political sup- port when it is needed. Table 2.1 shows typical symptoms that may indicate

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 29

a need for improvement in dealing with stakeholders and addressing their needs: stakeholder complaints, apathy, dissatisfaction, and lack of stakeholder support for organizational objectives. Each of these attest to something “not quite right,” suggesting a gap between actual and desired performance in one or more of the above areas.

Organization

Many performance problems are caused by failure to adhere to basic prin- ciples of organizational design. This can produce symptoms such as infight- ing, lack of direction, micromanagement, spending too much time on coordination, plans that gather dust, and the inefficient use of or acquisition of resources. Employee demotivation may occur as a secondary result. These prob- lems affect programs as well as agencies as a whole. What are these basic principles that give rise to so many symptoms? Though authors define these differently, at heart, organizational design is about (1) deciding what the pur- pose of the organization is, and then (2) allocating responsibility, along with (3) resources, to getting the job done. Within this seemingly simple notion of focusing on the “what and how” lie a host of challenges and pitfalls.

One problem is that agency missions and program goals fail to serve im- portant needs in society (Problem 5). For many years the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was slow to adapt to the growing need for counterterrorism intelligence. Even following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the New York World Trade Center and elsewhere, it was reluctant to expand its mission in this area. Instead, it remained rooted in its post–World War II missions, which included counterespionage of Communist activities in the United States, even though this mission had diminished significance and had become outdated. This also happened at NASA, the space agency that had come into existence in the late 1950s after the U.S.S.R. (Russia) launched the world’s first satellite. Concerned about being dominated by the U.S.S.R. in space, President John F. Kennedy challenged the fledging U.S. space in- dustry to land a man on the moon and safely return him by the end of the 1960s. Since that historic accomplishment in 1969, NASA has struggled to find an equally compelling mission. It redefined its mission around a mix of unmanned space exploration, manned space flight, and advanced aeronau- tics, but none has captured the public’s imagination as the early Apollo mis- sions did. Agency missions and programs need to be periodically updated and aligned with important societal needs, or they become outdated. Perfor- mance improvement can begin by asking what missions are being pursued, and how relevant these missions are.

Sometimes agencies fail to acquire new mandates or authority in a timely

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

30 CHAPTER 2

fashion. Many contemporary local problems have a regional or intergovern- mental focus, such as environmental protection, transportation, education, and public safety. In each of these areas, new goals and objectives often exceed mandates of existing jurisdictions. For example, transportation solutions re- quire regional approaches to managing growth that often require new policy mandates for local jurisdictions. Sometimes, the authority that is sought is less encompassing, such as the ability to access information in another agency’s database. When agencies cannot acquire new mandates, progress becomes sty- mied, limited, and eventually unsatisfactory (Behn 1995).

Another problem occurs when well-aligned missions and necessary man- dates are inadequately pursued (Problem 6). A common occurrence is the ad- dition of new missions over time, sometimes reflecting stakeholder pressures. For example, many schools provide an ever-expanding range of nonacademic services to students, including after-school programs, teen counseling, sports activities, and so on. Diversification may dilute the main objective of learn- ing, and cause intra-organizational rivalry over resources and priorities. Non- profit organizations also sometimes overextend their resources in an effort to serve broad populations, thereby failing to serve client groups well. Not only does overreaching dilute grant writing and fundraising efforts, grant writing that is not closely linked to furthering core missions may take nonprofit or- ganizations into areas for which they are poorly equipped—the tail is wag- ging the dog. The lack of a clear mission-driven focus can cause missions to be inadequately pursued.

The improvement opportunity is for agencies to know what they are about, and what their priorities are (Bryson 2004). Problems arise when leaders fail to be clear about these points. Then, for example, the wrong people are as- signed to key positions. New ideas about how to pursue the mission are not solicited or followed up. Too little pressure is put on lower managers for performance. Work upon work is piled on. Leaders are overwhelmed, ill pre- pared, sidetracked, or excessively involved in operational program manage- ment. These problems can be exacerbated by leadership turnover, for example, causing too-frequent shifts in priorities; successive leaders set them, but they are not pursued long enough to create a focus for the agency. New programs are met with a sense of déjà vu. The agency, department, or program is seen as a rudderless ship (Caiden 1991).

Another consequence of leadership failure is that resources are not sought and acquired. In recent years, many organizations have hired grant writers to assist them in obtaining resources from federal and state agencies and pri- vate foundations. Those that have not may find themselves lacking resources to fully implement necessary programs. Leadership is needed to ensure that agencies have the direction and resources to carry out their missions.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 31

After responsibilities have been determined and assigned, people, re- sources, and technology are brought together—an organization is created. There are many different ways of organizing, and many take advantage of economies of scale (that is, size), economies of scope (that is, diversifica- tion), and cost-effective delivery methods, while being mindful of modern standards, the need for continuity, and the ability to adapt to changing cir- cumstances. These are some common standards for evaluating the effective- ness of organization. Problems occur when the organization or delivery technology is inefficient (Problem 7).

Obviously, there is no one best way of organizing; what works well for one organization may not work well for another. For example, medical im- aging technology often has economies of scale that require minimum utili- zation rates. Hospitals can organize this technology by purchasing it as equipment for individual service departments, by establishing new units that are viewed as cost or profit centers, by purchasing imaging services from third-party providers, by forming partnerships with other hospitals (thereby minimizing utilization uncertainty and avoiding third-party profits). What is best depends on specific factors; form must follow purpose. But when con- ditions or missions change, it is necessary to consider the organizational form. Does the specific form still make sense given changes in the mission or operating conditions? Is there a better, more cost-effective way to address the need?

Increasingly, organizations are evaluating their use of departments as ba- sic units of organization. Departments are justifiably used when there are well-defined areas of responsibility that have continuity of purpose, and when there are minimum economies of scale, scope, or a critical mass that must be met. Departments also shield organizations from resource uncertainty, for example, by ensuring a pool of qualified personnel. But concerns about the rigidity of departments and sometimes high cost structures cause top manag- ers to consider partnerships, alliances, and outsourcing as alternative ways for obtaining capacity. The latter may provide a more flexible and cost- effective approach to mission accomplishment, especially in areas in which developing expertise or economies of scale are not the agency’s main focus. For example, agencies increasingly contract out for their routine administra- tive and maintenance functions.

Modern thinking about delivery processes and the use of information tech- nology has also changed organization forms. Internet and intranet pages now allow offsite access to electronic databases and help organizations deal effi- ciently with many routine client inquiries. Delivery approaches emphasize streamlining, fewer steps, and greater responsibility for outcomes. These of- ten involve process reengineering and approaches to employee empower-

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

32 CHAPTER 2

ment discussed in later chapters. When too many people or units become involved, errors and delays occur. The ability to utilize new forms of organi- zation to increase responsiveness and achieve lower costs is a hallmark of modern organizations. When organizations fail to take advantage of these new forms, they often experience employee and stakeholder complaints about the inability to provide requested services.

The corollary of organization is coordination (Problem 8). Many manag- ers spend much time coordinating the efforts of departments and people. There is truth in the expression that management is the art of getting work done through others. Organizations are increasingly networked, which means that they depend on cooperation and collaboration (Goldsmith and Eggers 2004). Reflecting this, the federal emergency response plan is now retitled as the National Response Plan, highlighting coordination with numerous local and state agencies. When people fail to cooperate and collaborate, programs become ineffective. This may be caused by lack of understanding of the mis- sion, improper assignment of responsibility, failure to collaborate, political rivalry, or other reasons. Whatever the cause, lack of coordination reduces program effectiveness.

Coordination requires effective communication. Unclear or contradic- tory communication is an obvious area for improvement (Problem 9). Com- munication is seldom a matter of people not hearing each other well; it is more commonly a problem of not having a clear understanding of respon- sibilities, of what is expected from them in terms of both results and com- munication, and how their authority relates to that of others. Problems arise when people are confused about their roles and how they relate to others. People make assumptions, some of which cause conflict. A lack of unified command sends conflicting signals, cultural biases interpret messages in ways that add to confusion; major technology failures can sometimes be traced to command structures failing to heed warnings or giving unclear instructions (Garrett 2004).

People vary in how they interpret what is said between the lines. Complex rules breed uncertainty and confusion. A general guideline is to keep under- standings, expectations, and relations as simple as possible. Ironically, policy manuals seldom dispel this confusion, either because they are quite complex or because they fail to communicate what is needed to get the job done. People forget their rules, or are confused about how they apply in a variety of different situations.

Finally, problems occur when rewards do not support the mission (Prob- lem 10). Every formal structure depends on informal relations and goodwill to produce quality results. Individuals must be willing to go above and be- yond that which is expected of them in order to deal with unforeseen situa-

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 33

tions. Feedback is the mechanism through which the effectiveness of past actions is assessed; rewards, incentives, and norms are means to encourage future productive behavior. People and organizations need to know through material recognition and other forms of acknowledgment that they are doing well; they also need to know when improvements are needed. When rewards are perceived as small and insignificant, managers lose an important tool of motivation, and morale and productivity may suffer. When positive feedback (praise, etc.) is withheld, employees receive the message that the impact was not noteworthy. Indeed, a frequent workplace complaint is that employees and managers are not given sufficient positive and consistent feedback or recognition for their work. Employees may also receive contradictory sig- nals, which undermine the mission—encouraging risk while punishing fail- ure encourages risk-avoidance and make-believe risk-taking.

Projects

Whereas the above focuses on organizations and programs, the following focuses on projects and work activities. When projects are managed poorly, they fall behind schedule, lack relevance, exceed costs, and fail to meet stan- dards, yielding stakeholder dissatisfaction or apathy. They fail to contribute to the agency’s mission. Project management is about avoiding these out- comes. The hallmark of properly managed programs is that they achieve their objectives (1) on time, (2) within budget, and (3) at or above quality and performance specifications.

Planning is more than developing to-do lists, though it involves these, too. Planning involves the assessment of goals, identifying resources and strate- gies, assessing the quality of resources, combining resources and strategies into a timetable, and anticipating challenges to performance and developing contingency plans. An important expression is: “people don’t plan to fail, they fail to plan” (Problem 11, Table 2.2). Improvement begins by asking how well planning occurs.

Legislators and top leaders frequently formulate lofty goals that are broad, appealing, and . . . infeasible. During the 1960s and 1970s, neither the War on Poverty nor the War on Cancer could eliminate poverty or cancer; both persist. Of course, progress and very worthwhile achievements were made. When “stretch” goals are set that challenge current abilities, realistic tar- gets should be set for evaluating progress toward final ends. Before the Apollo 11 mission could land a man on the moon, the Apollo 9 mission circled the moon and operated the lunar landing craft just to develop those capabilities. They were significant stretch objectives that allowed for sub- sequent missions. Progress is made in challenging but realistic steps; projects

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

34 CHAPTER 2

fail when goals are too far beyond current abilities. The art is to get the learning steps just right.

After the goal has been determined, managers must ensure that they have sufficient resources and the right strategies to get the job done. If personnel or resources are lacking, or inefficiently deployed, then accomplishments (objectives) or timetables will suffer. A timetable is not a wish list; it reflects

Table 2.2

Major Performance Problems, Part 2

Major Project Problems Typical symptoms of project problems: insufficient relevance, falling behind schedule, not achieving results, going way over budget, and having upset or apathetic clients and other stakeholders.

Problem 11: Inadequate planning. Variations: Unrealistic goals, misalignment between ends and strategies, resources are poor or inadequate, lack of a contingency strategy.

Problem 12: Inadequate control of execution. Variations: Not sufficiently knowing the status of projects or events that affect projects, allowing partners and people to get sidetracked.

Problem 13: Lack of satisfaction among clients or stakeholders. Variations: Clients insufficiently involved, clients’ needs wrongly assumed (see Problem 1).

Major People Problems Typical symptoms of people problems: people shunning their work, manager, or coworkers, staff demotivation, formal or informal complaints against a person, projects falling behind, lack of new programs, successful programs, or program leadership. Note: These symptoms are not always caused by people problems. People may show these symptoms when caused by other problems such as poor coordina- tion or red tape.

Problem 14: Values are insufficiently professional. Variations: Unethical or a-ethical behavior, disinterest in skill development.

Problem 15: Technical skills are lacking. Variations: Inability to acquire modern skills, avoiding activities that require technical skills, denial that skills are lacking, mediocrity, micromanagement.

Problem 16: Poor social skills. Variations: Being too confrontational or too accommodating, being impulsive, being closed to constructive criticism or opportunities for growth.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 35

the fit among the goals, strategy, and resources. If the strategy is inefficient, it will take longer to accomplish the goal. If the strategy is ineffective, the goal may never be reached. If mediocre talent is assigned to projects that require expertise and judgment, the results will often be lesser results.

Another purpose of planning is to develop contingency plans by anticipat- ing unexpected events. A lack of planning and foresight gives room for cata- strophic events to occur which, according to Murphy’s Law (“what can go wrong will go wrong”) they have a tendency to do. The more managers know about a project and its conditions for success, the more managers will want to plan. Inadequate concern for possible failure is a red flag; it may be a sign of naiveté, wishful thinking, mediocrity, inadequate commitment to success, or unimaginative foresight about what can go wrong. The improvement opportu- nity is to take planning seriously, to acquire the right resources, have plans for contingencies, and be certain of the standards and timetables that are to be met.

Another project problem is inadequate control of execution (Problem 12). Delays have myriad causes and not everything can be foreseen. Contingency strategies can help provide a quick response when something goes wrong, but even the best-laid plans cannot predict every way in which something can go awry. What is certain is that something unforeseen will occur. Project execution is very much about knowing what is occurring, so that the right responses are made. When managers fail to follow what is happening, they get blindsided by major errors and problems. Staff gets tasked with compet- ing projects, or partners squabble over an unforeseen obstacle. Some prob- lems, such as shoddy work, become evident only by hands-on involvement and inspection. The point about execution is to get to the finish line and do that well. When managers fail to measure progress against milestones and target dates, slippage often occurs.

Problems of stakeholder dissatisfaction, discussed earlier in this chapter, are sometimes revisited in project management (Problem 13). When clients are inadequately involved in project decision making and fail, for whatever reason, to articulate their needs they may become dissatisfied later. For ex- ample, a parks and recreation department provides card games for seniors, who prefer aerobic exercise or even computer training. Or a public works department breaks open a road for repairs, assuming that residents won’t mind the inconvenience for a month or two. When a budget office acquires a new software program for tracking expenditures and accomplishments with- out adequate input prior to purchase from users as internal clients, then these departments are apt to be dissatisfied and the program ill-suited to their needs. Failure to correctly know and manage client priorities increases the likeli- hood of their dissatisfaction and hence project failure, regardless of any tech- nical mastery and execution.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

36 CHAPTER 2

People

It is obvious that people are key to making organizations work. When they fail, so too do many organizations and their programs. People are a critical resource. Typical symptoms of people problems are people shunning their work, their manager or their coworkers, staff demotivation, formal or infor- mal complaints against a person, projects falling behind, and lack of new programs, successful programs, or program leadership.

Some people problems reflect having inadequate professional norms and standards (Problem 14). Professionalism is more than a set of skills or achieve- ments: it involves personally held beliefs which, today, often emphasize orientation toward stakeholders, accountability, openness, integrity, and pro- fessional standards. These convictions are surely not omnipresent, and when managers fail to articulate or prioritize these norms, unethical and unprofes- sional behavior by some employees will likely result. Problems range from lack of courtesy and respect, to inadequate awareness and commitment to norms and high standards of professionalism, to lack of attention to blatant violations of agency rules and laws. This, then, gives rise to the symptoms of people problems in the above paragraph.

Organizations are increasingly requiring ethics workshops and short courses in order to reduce blatant disregard of important norms, and some are making ethics a criterion in hiring and promotion. Beyond these prob- lems, the lack of commitment to professional standards may lower perfor- mance in ways that are only barely acceptable, as well as other problems discussed below (Bowman et al. 2004; Cooper 1998). The improvement op- portunity is to set clear and consistent standards for professionalism, and to intervene at the earliest opportunity when standards are not sufficiently met.

Performance problems occur when people lack up-to-date technical skills for the work they are expected to do (Problem 15). For employees, these skills concern technical aspects related to work areas, including information technology applications, as well as basic aspects of project management. For managers, these skills include many of the organizational improvement strat- egies and techniques as well. When technical skills are deficient, work is performed at sub-standard levels or inefficiently. For example, a land sur- veyor who does not use the latest methods will take longer and be less accu- rate. Mental health workers who are unfamiliar with the latest therapies will be less effective. At worse, the lack of technical skills causes employees and managers to avoid activities that require these skills. Managers who lack quantitative skills may fail to undertake what-if analyses to maximize per- formance, for example. Such managers may also fail to appreciate the needs of subordinates who do have these skills, and to adequately plan the devel-

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 37

opment of these skills in their units. When managers lack technical skills, they miss out on opportunities to improve their unit’s performance.

However, technical skills alone do not ensure productivity by people. So- cial skills grease the wheels of human interaction (Problem 16). Different perspectives exist regarding critically needed social skills. Covey (1992) dis- cusses the importance of refraining from saying unkind or negative things; the importance of exercising patience with others; keeping promises made to others; assuming the best in others; seeking to understand before reacting; giving an understanding response (rather than evaluative); admitting mis- takes, apologizing and asking for forgiveness; allowing yourself to be influ- enced; and distinguishing between the person and the problem. According to Goleman (1995), the fundamentals of emotional intelligence (EQ) are: self- awareness (about one’s feelings), impulse control, optimism in face of set- backs, the ability to identify and respond to the unspoken feelings of others, handling emotional reactions in others, interacting smoothly, and managing relations effectively. This is a broader perspective.

It is obvious that deficits in people skills, however defined, lead to prob- lems in productivity. However, addressing social skill deficits can be chal- lenging. Many workplaces lack patterns of communication in which social interactions and skills are discussed, and in which people receive feedback and support for improvement. In some environments, open communication is intentionally avoided (de Vries and Miller 1984). Unaware of such defi- cits, poor social skills go unchecked, and people falsely assume that others are aware of their own poor social skills. To help address this problem, chap- ter 7 discusses successful new ways of opening up the dialog. People may learn to adjust their responses through feedback and coaching.

Sometimes the social skill deficit problem runs deep and in ways that pose ongoing performance challenges for managers. Poor interactions may reflect severe problems that employees are unwilling or unable to change. People with significant depression or anxiety may not to be able to address deficits such as controlling one’s impulses or identifying and being empathetic about the feelings of others. It may be difficult for obsessive-compulsive persons to refrain from saying unkind things, and codependency and addic- tion may cause people to be too accommodating, showing a lack of leader- ship. Rubbing people the wrong way may stem from deep personal insecurities and uncontrolled envy aimed at coworkers or colleagues who perform highly. Of course, not everyone with “people problems” has these underlying prob- lems, or even to a strong extent. But for those who do become performance challenges for managers; the adage that 80 percent of the problems are caused by 20 percent of the people certainly applies. It is obvious that social skills continue to be an area of significant managerial concern.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

38 CHAPTER 2

Problem Definition as Activity

There are many possible performance problems, but for managers who are well familiar with their units, improvement opportunities in the above areas often are all too obvious. They know their unit’s challenges well—too well, perhaps. Implicitly or explicitly, they have articulated standards, or others have told them what standards are to be met. They have prioritized their problems; they know what they need to work on first. The squeaky wheel is identified and needs to be addressed. But sometimes the underling problem may not always be so obvious, to them or to others. Supervisors of managers are apt to want to ascertain managers’ diagnosis or statement of the problem; top leaders may want to engage in their own fact-finding. They will study the unit a bit, get some data and facts, and perhaps interview some employees or clients. This is also the case for new managers, consultants, and employees who are new to the organization. Things may not be fully as they appear. Sometimes problem definition is obvious, and sometimes it needs a bit of work. When problem definition is its own distinct activity, it is generally an iterative process that involves the following: (1) obtaining information about manifested symptoms, as well as associated circumstances and underlying causes; (2) assessing information about symptoms and causes against stan- dards or a vision of the future, and developing a statement of the problem that expresses the gap between what is, and what should or could be; and (3) identifying strategies that help realize the future in ways that both address the manifest symptoms and their causes, and which move the organization forward in ways that are consistent with its broader priorities (Harrison 2004; Swanson 1996). These activities and their relationships are shown in Figure 2.1. This often is an iterative process that is not very linear. Information dribbles in, a bit from here and there, and managers assess initial conclu- sions until they are crystallized in a coherent and consistent way. Of course, at times the problem is straightforward—clients are not being attended to and the employees that should be doing so are all out for lunch. But some- times the problem, standard, or intervention is not well defined, and manag- ers must then develop their own understanding of these matters. Sometimes stakeholders have very strong opinions that are a given for managers, but even then managers will want to formulate their own understanding and de- termine what other problems might be resolved as well.

A core challenge to accurate problem definition often is that organiza- tions present symptoms that do not fully reflect the range of problems that should be considered. For example, consider an organization in which mani- fest symptoms are infighting between units and low employee morale. But there may be more than meets the eye—there may be other relevant facts to

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 39

consider as part of problem diagnosis. For example, what if both infighting and low morale are caused by managers failing to identify priorities for the organization? Lack of leadership can readily give rise to these symptoms; units bicker to make their programs more important, and employees get caught up in this; for many, a loss of pride occurs. Yet, the lack of leadership may not be manifest, especially if it is covered up. If leadership is a problem and prioritization is not addressed, then the above problems are likely to persist or resurface at some point. Hasty diagnosis is the result of not digging deep enough, and thus making wrong conclusions. We need to ask why the mani- fest symptoms are occurring, before assuming that they constitute the entire problem. The following symptoms are red flags for the very likely possibil- ity of deeper underlying problems: client complaints, infighting and pro- longed turf battles, plans that gather dust, frequent lawsuits, excessive time in coordination and troubleshooting activities, employee demotivation, projects falling behind schedule or going over budget, and lack of new pro- gram development. Digging just a little deeper in any of these areas typically reveals a range of problems, many of which have been described in this chap- ter. Even experienced managers make the mistake of incorrectly identifying their unit’s problems; they, too, need to dig deeply.

As an aside, some analogies exist between organizational performance and medical diagnosis. In both, symptoms can have different underlying causes; stomachaches could indicate indigestion or something far worse; low client satisfaction could be caused by many different things. We can’t infer the problem from the symptom and vice versa; we need to establish the chain of causality. Analysis implies evaluating symptoms against contexts of what is normal and what is not. Poor doctors treat symptoms and fail to recognize underlying causes. Likewise, when defining performance problems we need know what normal organizational functioning is, the symptoms of malfunc- tioning, and processes (problems) that give rise to these symptoms. Finally, when considering possible problems, it makes sense to first consider com- monly occurring problems, rather than those that are interesting and exotic but that rarely occur. This chapter’s problems are certainly among those that frequently occur.

It is also well worth noting that the problem definition does not define the

Figure 2.1 Processes of Problem Definition

Manifest Symptoms, Underlying Causes,

Other Circumstances

Problem Definition, Standards, Vision

Improvement Strategies, Other

Organizational Goals

—— The Facts —— ––––––—— Ends and Means ——––––––

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

40 CHAPTER 2

solution. The lack of leadership does not mean that the solution is more lead- ership. It may be to abolish the unit whose leadership has been lacking. Prob- lem definition and problem solution are separate matters. Too many cost overruns in a program or activity does not mean doing less of the program or activity in order to reduce costs—it may be to do the program or activity in a more efficient way. There are options; there is more than one road that leads to Rome. However, the initial symptoms remain at the heart of the improve- ment effort, as it continues to define what needs to be improved.

A good problem definition is one that incorporates the manifest symp- toms and includes a set of viable strategies for leading the organization for- ward. When managers want to be able to consider a broad range of possible strategies, it is helpful to formulate problems as community outcomes or social behaviors. For example, if there is too much disease (a community outcome), then possible strategies include improving communications, in- creasing access to medical services, providing consequences for certain be- haviors, and so on. However, if only a smaller set is to be considered, then problems might be defined as shortcomings of agency processes and proce- dures. If the disease problem is defined as inadequate outreach by the agency, then solutions are more restrictedly focused toward that, and value-based preferences, such as for partnerships or limited government, can be used to further narrow the range of acceptable strategies. Problem definition does not determine the solution strategy, but it does help shape it.

In sum, the process of problem definition usually starts with taking inven- tory of manifest symptoms, and then searching for associated facts and un- derlying causes. Consider the following example. Clients complain about shoddy and untimely service, and we find this to be a fact. We then identify possible causes based on the service delivery process and consider factors suggested by the inventory of problems later in this chapter. We use our imagination about what that could be. Then, through analysis and dialog with clients and employees, through which additional facts are raised, a con- clusion is reached about one or more factors constituting the problem that, if resolved, would address the symptoms and other issues that may have sur- faced. Sometimes, a standard or vision for future performance needs to be separately generated, if it did not surface through this process. Talking with clients can bring up new standards, and elected officials often have their own ideas, too. Professional managers have their own training from which stan- dards follow, and may know standards of best practices used elsewhere. Some are implied in this chapter. Sometimes, the standard is simply doing what the organization has already committed itself to, such as serving a broad range of populations, or completing service requests in a timely manner.

An important, final step in problem definition is to marshal evidence about

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

MAJOR PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES 41

the extent of the problem. Quantification of problems is not always possible, but whatever evidence is available should be brought to bear, including an- ecdotal evidence. One client complaint does not prove much, but twenty might. It matters whether 4 percent or 40 percent of road repairs exceed their estimated repair time or cost. To quantify the problem is to help evaluate the extent of it, but how much is too much or how little is too little? Rarely are published standards available; managers will need to set their own standards based on past performance and future expectations. Then, is there a big or little gap between reality and expectation? Quantification also suggests pos- sible targets for improvement, of course, and it is a segue into further analy- sis about ends and means. What is the cost of reducing the road delays to from 40 percent to, say, 20 percent, 10 percent, or 5 percent? Maybe a new process can be introduced that is used elsewhere as a best practice. What is the cost of implementing the new process now and over the lifetime of the next twenty projects, compared to the cost of continuing with business as it is done now? Such analyses often help to sharpen the problem definition.

In Conclusion

There are many performance problems in organizations. Problem definition is about defining the gap between what is, and what should be—too much this, or too little that? This chapter identifies major problems in the areas of dealing with stakeholders, organization, project management, and working with people. It shows myriad variations of these problems. It is obvious that the job of managers is to become aware of the problems in their organiza- tions, and then to successfully address them. This typically involves a little digging beyond the surface of manifest symptoms. Hasty diagnosis is the result of not digging deep enough, which may cause managers to address symptoms rather than their underlying causes.

At any point in time, managers will face numerous challenges—more than can be worked on at any time. Chapter 3 helps managers choose those that they will likely want to work on, and which doing so will increase the likeli- hood of implementation success. Subsequent chapters describe different per- formance improvement strategies. Problems of goal setting, stakeholder orientation, and customer-focus are often addressed by strategic planning (chapter 4) and quality management (chapter 5). Problems of delivery pro- cesses and customer satisfaction can sometimes involve information tech- nology (chapter 6). Problems of standards, accountability, and feedback can sometimes be addressed through performance measurement (chapter 8). Strat- egies for dealing with problems of collaboration with external partners are discussed in chapter 9. Problems of individual motivation and behavior, com-

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .

42 CHAPTER 2

munication, and the productivity of teams are discussed in chapter 7. A col- lection of classic tools discussed in chapter 10 discusses problems of project management, cost control, and raising revenues.

Application Exercises

1. Make a list of some manifest symptoms that are problematic in your organization. Then, for each, decide whether it is a performance problem as mentioned in this chapter, or whether there is some un- derlying process or cause that should be more appropriately targeted as the performance problem. Note any symptoms that often are used as red flags for indicating underlying problems. Some examples of manifest symptoms may include staff turnover or demotivation, cli- ent complaints, rework, or cost-overruns.

2. Identify one or more organizational problems in your organization, as shown in Table 2.1. Use this table as a checklist. Prioritize these prob- lems, and then identify the most important one. What symptoms does the problem give rise to? What is the magnitude of this problem? How would you measure it, and progress toward resolving it?

3. Identify some problems of stakeholders as affecting your program or agency. How might these be addressed?

4. Research the literature for examples of best practices and standards in the areas that you identified as problems. How might these best practices be adopted in your organization?

5. Identify some opportunities for personal growth as identified in the section on people problems. Which skill(s) do you want to work on? How does the deficiency affect you? How can you make progress toward improving it?

6. “Problem definition does not define the solution.” Explain, and give some examples.

C o p yr

ig h t ©

2 0 0 6 . T

a yl

o r

& F

ra n ci

s G

ro u p . A

ll ri g h ts

r e se

rv e d .