“If you attend my class”, the professor said, “You should be able to pass the test.” The ‘law students’ in the class perked up immediately.

“What do you mean by ‘attendance’?” they asked. “If I arrive late or leave early, is that ok? What about sick days? Can I tape the class? Does community service count?”

It amazes me to see such effort expended in a quest for ‘compliance’. Instead of accepting that “attendance means attendance”, the legalistic mind envisions collecting up and cashing in any and all behaviors, credits and frequent flier coupons that will earn the check mark of compliance.

“I met the attendance requirements. I did what you said. Why didn’t I pass?” they will ask.

The answer, the honest truth is that when it came to “attendance”, this crowd was desperately looking for a way to not attend, and yet claim that they did.

Muddle Management

It’s the work place where this attitude really concerns me. In school, at least in the serious ones, students pass when they master the material. Attendance and grades are not a matter of compliance, but of performance.

Alumni of what I call the “Let’s not, and say we did” school of management turn up at all levels of business, and are the principal impediment to operation improvement.

“Muddle Management” will declare meetings to have been held even if no one shows up. They will pronounce operators “trained” if the company has purchased an instructional video. Project tasks will be marked as completed not because the work has been done, because their scheduled time has past. A "quality" initiative means certifications, awards or some other quality compliance “check mark”.

Root Cause

Ideally, the decision support function in a business is charged with providing a “complete and clear picture” of the current state of the business – i.e. metrics and their measures. Most internal reporting and analysis does not even approach this ideal.

Instead, metrics are typically subverted into a “complete and clear picture” of what management should be paid. The intent is to award salaries, bonuses and promotions based on performance; but the result is often that “compliance” is awarded.

If managers are 'bonused' for “three quality improvement and two cost savings initiatives”, then it is only natural for a muddle manager to think “How can I qualify? It is by the mechanism of misguided metrics and incentives that management attention is diverted from performance to compliance.

Naturally, "muddle managers" are intensely interested in compliance metrics - as each iteration gives them some clue as to the kind of holiday they will be able to afford. The "ask the customer" (design-by-consensus) approach of most IT groups results in system refinements that reinforce this negative business culture.

Solution

To grow a performance oriented culture, you must start by revisiting what constitutes excellent performance. For tactical management, it is the correct and consistent operation of facilities. For engineering, it is capacities, capabilities & unit costs.

Metrics then need to reflect this "state of the business" and provide guidance for the manager on how to improve the business and not their W-2.

Are your metrics designed for "Better Decisions, Better Products and Lower Costs", or are they compliance report cards?