PMWORKINGPAPER(績(jī)效管理講座)

1、PMWORKINGPAPER 績(jī)效管理講座 May 3, 2021Performance Management:Enhancing Execution Through a Culture of DialoguePeter is Chief Executive Officer for a medical supply multinational that recently crafted a new strategy to counter competitive threats. The plan stressed the need to cut cycle time, concentrate

2、sales on higher-margin products and develop new markets.Four months after circulating the plan, Peter did a“ walkaround to see howthings were going. He was appalled. Everywhere Peter turned people, departmentswhole business units simply didn t “get it. First surprise: Engineering. The group had cut

3、product design time 30%, meeting its goal to increase speed-to-market. Good. Then Peter asked how manufacturing would be affected. It turned out the new design would take much more time to make. Total cycle time actually increased.“ Our strategic plan message is not really getting through, Peter tho

4、ught.Second surprise: Sales. The new strategy called for a shift emphasize high margin sales rather that pushing product down the pipeline as fast as possible. But just about every salesperson Peter spoke to was making transactional sales to high-volume customers; hardly anyone was building relation

5、ships with the most profitable prospects. Sales is doing just what its alPweatyesr done,thought.Worst surprise: Even his top team, the people whod helped him craft thestrategy, was not sticking to plan. Peter asked a team member:“Why are yspending all your time making sure the new machinery is worki

6、ng instead of developing new markets? “ But what aboutompanygoals? said Peter. “ We came up with a good planand com muni cated it veryclearly. But no where it isn t being carried out.Why?Many orga ni zati ons create good strategies, but only the best execute them effectively.Fortune magazine estimat

7、es that when CEOs fail, 70% of the time it s because of bexecuti on.by Ram Charan and Geoffrey Colvfnprtune magazine, June 21, 1999. Weak executi on is pervasive in the bus in ess world, but the reas ons for itare largely misunderstood. Why is it that no one in Peter s organization was actingsync wi

8、th the strategy? Uni ess we un dersta nd the reas ons, we can t hope to solve thproblem.Imagi ne some one hitt ing a tennis ball. Whe n the brain says“ hit the ball, it doeautomatically happe n. The message travels through n erve pathways dow n the armand crosses gaps between the nerve cells. These

9、gaps, or“ synapses, are potenti，breaks in the conn ecti on. Ifn eurotra nsmittersd on t carry the message across the gap, the message never gets through, or it gets distorted. When that happens, either the arm doesn t move at all, or it moves the wrong way.Creati ng a “ culture of dialogue Just like

10、 a n ervous system, orga ni zati ons also have gaps that block and distort messages. The secret to effective strategy executi on lies in cross ing hierarchical and fun cti onal gaps with clear, con siste nt messages that relay the strategy throughout the organization. Sound simple? It s not. The rea

11、son is that the“neurotransmittersorga ni zati ons are huma n bein gexecutive team members, senior man agers, middle managers and supervisorwhose job it is to make sure that people s behavior isalig ned with the overall strategy. Doi ng what it takes to achieve alig nment is very difficult. It is wha

12、t Ram Charan calls, the“ heavy lifting of management, and itkey to execut ing strategy.Three keys to managing performa neeA culture of dialogue doesn t happen ant more than a fluid tennis stroke does. It takes practice, persiste nee and hard work. So how exactly can leaders en sure that strategy mes

13、sages go all the way dow n the linthat the tennis ball gets hit correctly? The three keys to managing performa nee effectively are:1. Achieving radical clarity by decoding strategy at the top. Many organizationsWhy CEOs Fail,thi nk they send clear sig nals but don t. In some cases, man agers subord

14、in atebroad strategic goals to operati onal goals with in their silos. That at happe ned s wh with Peter s top team. Elsewhere, top team members often have too many“topprioritieswe ve see n as many as 100 in one caswhich relts in mixedsig nals and blurred focus. Strategy decode requires winnowing pr

15、iorities dow n toa man ageable nu mbeas little as five.2. Setting up systems and processes to ensure clarity. Once strategy is clear,orga ni zati ons must create processes to en sure that the right strategy messages cascade dow n the orga ni zati on. These in clude: strategy-ce ntered budget and pla

16、 nning sessi ons; staff and team meet ings to discuss goals; performa nee man ageme nt meet in gs; and tale nt review sessi ons. Dialogue drives all these processes. Each represe nts a“ tran smitter opport uni ty, where strategic messacare con veyed and behavior is alig ned with goals.3. Aligning an

17、d differentiating rewards.Leaders must make sure rewardsencourage behaviors consistent with strategy, which sounds easy but isn t.Differe ntiatio n is about maki ng sure that stars get sig nifica ntly more tha n poor performers. But almost everywhere man agers distribute rewards more or less evenly.

18、 As we ll see, lack of effective performanee dialogue is a key contributor to dysf unctional reward schemes.Link to compa ny valuati onCompa nies that man age performa nee weGe neral Electric comes to mi nd have higher market valuati ons. Why? Because, more and more, i nstitutio nal inv estors view

19、strategy executi on as a vital factor in flue ncing stock prices.Just a few years ago institutional investors relied almost exclusively on financial measures for compa ny valuati ons. Now 35% of a market valuati on is in flue need by non-finan cial, i ntan gible factors, accordi ng to a study by Ern

20、st & YoungBased on a study con ducted by Sarah Mavri nac and Tony Siesfeld for the Ernst & You ng Cen ter forBusin ess Inno vati on. The study showed that “ execution of corporate strategy and “ management credibility ranked number one and number two in importance to institutional investors out of 2

21、2 nonfinan cial measures. Joh n In ch, a managing director and an alyst at Bear Stear ns no tes that in some sectors, such as diversified in dustrial compa ni es, in tan gibles acco unt for even more up to half a company s value. “You can take even a mundane asset and inject good man ageme nt and ha

22、ve someth ing pretty strong, says In ch.1. Achieve Radical Clarity by decoding strategy at the topThe first step in successfully executing strategy is achieving clarity on the top team, which is freque ntly the source of garbled sig nals.Lack of Clarity at the TopA recent Hay Group study shows a dis

23、turbing lack of clarity on top teams(orga ni zati onal clarity measures the exte nt to which employees un dersta nd what isexpected of them and how those expectations connect with the organization s largegoals). The chart below shows dramatically higher levels of clarity on outstanding vs.average te

24、ams. In fact the biggest sin gle differe nce betwee n great and average top teams and typical ones was in the level of internal clarity. See Figure 1.Figure 1: Organizational Climate and TeamsFigure 1: Measures orga ni zati onal climate dime nsions for outsta ndinglypiclOutstanding588 7 6 520ctD也宅33

25、乩top teams vs. typical on es.For each dime nsion of climate we asked how the team wasperformi ng in reality and how it should be perform ing.The n we measured theFlexibilityStandardsRes pcnsibilltyRewardsClarityTotallearn Commrtmentdifferenee or“ gap in thean swers. Gaps over 20% hurtperformance. Th

26、e“ clarityOrganizational climate and teamsHay/McBersChange Hay/McBer to“ Source: Hay Group, Inc. in final versionAnd a Lack of Clarity BelowWorkers at lower levels stro ngly feel this lack of clarity. Figure 2 looks at satisfact ion levels for workers pla nning to leave their orga ni zati ons within

27、 two years versus those3Hay Group part nered with Richard Hackma n of Harvard Un iversity and Ruth Wagema n of DartmouthCollege to ide ntify the dyn amics of top executive teams and their impact on performa nce. From an in itial group of 48 teams, the researchers n arrowed their study to 14 teams, m

28、any from large global orga ni zati ons. Each team member represe nted the head of an orga ni zati on, a major bus in ess divisi on, or a major geography.pla nning to stay Ion ger. This study showed that a key reas on people leave their jobs is that they feel their compa nies lack direct ion. Eve n a

29、mong employees pla nning to stay more tha n two years at their compa niesp nly 57% felt their orga ni zati ons had a clear sense of direct ion.Figure 2: Key reas ons why employees leave their compa niesTotal % SatisfiedSource: Hay Group, Inc. The results are from our Employee Attitude Survey, which

30、sampled some300 companies representing more than 1 million workers. Our survey queried management,professionals, salespeople, information tech nologists, and clerical and hourly workers. The referred to in the table is the“ satisfaction gap between workers planning to leave within two yearsand those

31、 pla nning to stay lon ger.Satisfacti on with:Employees pla nning to stay more tha n two years (%)Employees p anning to leave in less tha n two years (%)GAP(%)1. Use of my skills and abilities83%49%34%2. Ability of top man ageme nt74%41%33%3. Compa ny has clear sense of direct ion57%27%30%NOTE; HIGH

32、LIGHT SECTION 3; MAKE IT POP GRAPHICALLYClarity mattersWhy do employees crave clarity? Think about it. What could be more demoraliz ing than the realization that your hard work is not contributing to overall company goals? Employees want to do the “right thing, but they can only do so if they know w

33、hat the right things are.“ Don t you guys realize that if we can t cut our refining costa baltbre e centsthey re going to shut us down? he said.“Is that all you need us to do? replied the team members, taken aback. United by aclear directi on and shared own ership of the cause, team members en thusi

34、astically cut costs by five cents per gallon over the following year while continuing to maintain good safety and en vir onmen tal records.Narrow ing prioritiesHaving too many priorities can lead to lack of clarity. AeroMexico, for example, had worked with a strategy con sult ing firm that delivered

35、 a 249-page report list ing key performa nee in dicators (KPIs) for measuri ng progress by the en terprise. The goodnews was that the KPIs gave the top team metrics for measuring success. The bad news was that there were 100 of them, and they weren t prioritized.“ It was clear that execution would s

36、uffer unless we identified the most important ones, says AeroMexico CEO Arturo Barahona.“ So we discussed which onesconnected most directly with our strategic priorities and where we were in the business cycle, and aech team member settled on five chief goals. By gaining clarityon key objectives, th

37、e team greatly increased the odds that signals would transmit clearly down the line.Getting buy-in at the tops notourntceoammmoenmf bers to nodHay research on teams has shown that ittheir heads in agreement when new strategies are set in meetings, then go back to their division or department and car

38、ry on exactly as they had before. In effect, they end up sabotaging the plan. That s why gai-nininigs ebsusyential to effective execution, anddialogue is what makes it happen.IBM created an executive team consisting of six Ph.D-level technical leaders at an applied research unit. Their mission: buil

39、d strong relationships with top research universities so that IBM could recruit innovative scientists capable of developing breakthrough products. The problem was that the Ph.Ds, all world-class scientists, were used to competing for research dollars and dismissing each others ideas to advance their

40、 own. Getting them to work jointly and be held accountable for business results was going to be very difficult.In the first group meeting, the vice president simply assigned accountabilities to the various team members. I could see the scientists digging in their heels, says Harris Ginsberg, an inte

41、rnal leadership consultant who attended the meeting. No one was going to dictate to them what they should do. Even if theyd said yes to the VPs directives, adds Ginsberg, they would never have followed through.Ginsberg, who helps IBM business units clarify and execute strategy, knew the key was to g

42、et the scientists talking to each other. So he coached the vice president to change her behaviors. Rather than hand out directives, he suggested ways she could stimulate team dialogue about how to meet objectives. Ginsberg also counseled other team members about the need for a consensus process on a

43、n interdependent team.They all got it. At the next meeting the VP said, Our mandate is to create breakthrough products. Without access to talent at the top universities, we wont succeed. How are we going to get it? At first, Ginsberg recalls, she met silence. Finally one team member raised her hand.

44、 She was willing to get out there to the universities, and be more visible, go out with the recruiter and the senior humanresources people, said Ginsberg. She also agreed to help some up-and-coming scientists learn how to develop relationships with universities.A second team member said he would hel

45、p her make some calls. The ice was broken and all the team members eventually took on group responsibilities. It was all about dialogue, says Ginsberg. Until the individual leaders embraced the unifying elements of the strategy for the good of the enterprise, they only attended to their own mission.

46、 The dialogue helped them buy-in, agree to some shared activities, and begin to work more collaboratively.2. Set up systems and processes to create clarityWhy is executing strategy so difficult, even when the plan is clear? Because goodexecution only happens when employee behavior is aligned with st

47、rategy. And many, 丄managerscan t, won t or dcorenatethtetransmitter opportunitiesrequired to getpeople to do the right things. Managers:canbtecause they don owt khnow to talk with their subordinates about change and/or poor performancew; ontb, ecause they find it uncomfortable to give candid feedbac

48、k; or, simply donrtealize that successful strategy execution will never happen without ongoing performance dialogue.Part of the solution to this problem is creating systems and processes thfaotrce performance dialogue. General Dynamics Defense Systems (GDDS) in Pittsfield, MA, is one company where c

49、reating such systems has contributed to dramatic results. From 1999 to 2001, attrition among its valued software engineers dropped from 20 percent to 2.4 percent. Union grievances dropped from 57 to zero, saving hundreds of thousands of dollars. And, best of all, earnings and profit margins doubled.

50、What GDDS didIn 1999 the $200 million plus defense contractor challenged its employees to improve the company s negotiating leverage on bids, and thereby increase margins and profitability. To accomplish this goal, senior management directed all departments to chase out costs, and created numeroupsr

51、ocessesto transmit the cost-cutting strategy down the managerial ranks right to the shop floor, which is where they felt many of the best cost-cutting ideas would come fromCarmen Simonelli, director of facilities and security, says his department s goal wasto push labor costs 5 percent below budget,

52、 with a“ stretch goal of 6 percent. Thawas ambitious given that direct applied labor costs had been running 10-15 percentover budget. But Simonellis team slashedaabpopt Iliheodulrs to an unthinkable20percent below budget. Annual savings amounted to about $440,000 on a $2 million budget, or nearly $1

53、0,000 per worker.How did they do it? The key, Simonelli says, was the processes the company put in place to enhance dialogue and carry the message to the shop floor. For example:The Learning MapThe company made it easy for employees to understand its broad goals by creating a “ learning map, which g

54、raphically outlined how each department and team linked directly to core objectives. All employees saw at a glance how their jobs fit in.Supervisors and assemblers in Simonellis group, for example, could readily see thatby reducing applied labor hours in a project, GDDS could increase margins, short

55、en delivery schedules and raise the chances for winning new contracts.The ScorecardManagers and direct reports at GDDS meet one on one to create Scorecards, which set out five to seven personal annual goals. For example, the goals for shipping and receiving supervisor Tom Molleurs included plans to

56、capture all incentive payments for early delivery and to cut direct costs 5%. Once a manager and subordinate reach agreement goals, they both sign the Scorecard as if it were a contract. From the worker s perspective, this was a dramatic shift, says Newell“Tom Skinner, at thetime director of product

57、 delivery.“In the past we just set the goals and beat upemployees to try to make them, but they probably didnt even know why we had thatgoal in the first place. Scorecards are“ transmitter opportunities that clarify expectations a-tnod- link dayday activity to company goals. And they work. Molleurs

58、group ended up cuttingdirect costs by 50 percent not just 5 percent. What was the key thing that made it happen? Molleurs points to his weekly progress meetings. When they were behind schedule, Molleurs used the meetings to make sure the workers understood, through the Learning Map and Scorecards and other processes, how meeting or beating delivery schedules could increase competitiveness