Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Resolve to stand out this year

How do you contribute to your organization? Are you good at what you do? Are you an expert? Are you reliable? Helpful? Conscientious? Hard working? Do you consistently do your part?


If you answered “yes” to those questions, you are most likely contributing. However, you might not be standing out from the crowd.


We all have two sources from which we can contribute: 1) our position/role and 2) our intrinsic values and behaviors.


Every role in an organization has a basic value proposition (assuming that it is performed competently). A teacher helps students learn, a nurse tends to the needs of a patient, a musician in a symphony play his or her part flawlessly. However, that contribution isn’t really theirs. It belongs to their role.


It doesn’t matter who is performing the role. If the person is competent, they will contribute. Even if the person is an expert, their value is still based on the role. The expertise just allows them to fully deliver that value. It’s true that people who stand out consistently deliver the contribution that comes from their role. However, they don’t stop there.


People who stand out contribute something unique to the organization – It could be the teacher who makes a special connection with his or her students or the musician who, in addition to playing with technical excellence, is able to bring a new interpretation to the song. In fact, the people who stand out aren’t always the best technically. Think of your favorite teacher, musician, entertainer, leader. What makes that person your favorite? It probably isn’t their technical expertise.


To start thinking about how to position your contribution, try this quick exercise. Draw the following diagram.






In the top half, write out the main contributions that you make based on your role. Then, on the bottom half, write the unique contributions that you’d like to bring to your role.


Assess the things that you are working on and their contribution on a regular basis. Compare them to the chart. Make sure that you are drawing as much as possible from the right side.


Make this the year that you separate yourself from your role. Continue to perform the job that is expected of you but bring more of yourself to it.


--------------------------------
Brad Kolar is the President of Kolar Associates, a leadership consulting and workforce productivity consulting firm. He can be reached at brad.kolar@kolarassociates.com.

Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Decision-driven data

By now, we all know that we are supposed to be making data-driven decisions. Yet, most leaders still struggle to use data effectively. I think that one of the main culprits is that we’ve become data-intensive rather than data-driven.

I recently worked with a leader to streamline his customer satisfaction reports. His report had eight columns of metrics and thirty rows of data – one for each department in his business. That’s 240 discrete pieces of information on one report. No one can processes and keep track of that much information at once. The report was too overwhelming. It was typical of most reports that I see.

I often see reports fall into three traps:

1) They mix outcome data with diagnostic data.

2) They are focused on information rather than action

3) They try to have the most amount of information in order to answer ANY question that the user might have

The result – reports with hundreds or even thousands of data points that are almost impossible to sift through for insights.

I worked with this particular leader to correct these three problems.

Separating outcomes and diagnostic data
Take a look at your dashboard the next time you are in your car. These days, there are only a few indicator lights: oil pressure, engine temperature, and check engine. The lights don’t tell you what’s wrong. Their point is to alert you to take action. When you take the car into the mechanic, he or she plugs a diagnostic tool into a port under your steering wheel. That tool pulls the detailed diagnostic codes needed to determine the problem.

By separating the outcome/action data from the diagnostic data, car manufacturers have greatly clarified and simplified the driver’s decision-making.

The same can be true with business reports. You don’t need diagnostic and outcome information on the same report. It adds too much detail. At best it distracts you from making a decision. At worst, it obscures the decision as you focus your attention in the wrong places of the report

The leader with whom I was working needed to know upon which departments to focus his attention. That was his main decision. Once he knew where to focus, we could use the detailed diagnostic data and KPIs to figure out the specific problem.

To make his initial decision (where and how to focus) there were only two pieces of data that he needed: whether the department was hitting its target and whether the performance increasing or decreasing. So, right from the start, we were able to eliminate six columns (180 pieces of data) from the report.

Focusing on decisions
Reports shouldn’t be designed to simply inform, they should be designed to drive actions. The closer your report aligns with your decisions, the more effective it will be. Often the data on a report is two, three or four steps removed from the decision. To move your report closer to the decision, ask yourself what criteria you use to determine action (and what those subsequent actions would be).

Joe chose one of three simple actions in response to his department's performance:
  • Take major and immediate action
  • No immediate action needed but needs to monitor performance
  • No action required at all
These actions might sound overly simple. But, they represented the first set of decisions he made in determining how and where to act. All of the extra data on his reported, clouded his ability to triage and make this simple set of decisions.

His decision rules and actions are summarized in the following chart:



We now had the data aligned with his decision process.

Focusing data
Trying to have one report that can answer any possible question reduces the report’s effectiveness at answering any specific questions. There’s too much data to absorb. The best reports have least amount of information needed to take action.

Our final step was to redesign his reports to align his data and decisions. His new report simply placed each department into the appropriate box on his decision model.

Now, instead of having a report that forces him to wade through 240 pieces of data to determine an action he has a report where the actions pop right off the page. Of course, this report doesn’t provide the specific action but it does tell him where and how to focus. Notice that although this report is based on metrics and data, it doesn’t show them. It doesn’t need to at this point. His question is where and how to focus. This report answers that question simply and effectively.

Because the report is organized around his decision criteria (as opposed to the lower level information), he can also quickly assess the overall health of his organization:
  • Only one item in green – This raises a flag right away.
  • The majority of items are declining in performance - Could be a sign of overall organizational health or of some significant issue
  • "Immediate and major action” has the most departments - We probably need to make some major organizations changes
In addition, he can more easily find patterns that might help drive his actions:

  • Do the departments in the lower left have anything in common? (e.g., same manager, using similar programs, etc.)
  • Do the departments in the upper right (if there was more than one) have anything in common? Can we leverage anything from those departments?
  • Are the departments that are showing improvement ones that we been working on fixing?
Of course, all of those insights and questions could have come from the original report. It would have just taken a lot longer and the relationships wouldn’t have been as visible.

There are a lot of bad reports out there. We’ve become accustomed to reading and accepting them. But we don’t have to.

Many leaders tell me that they don’t have enough time to think about their data, their actions or about the “right” reports that they need. That is probably because they are spending too much time pouring through unnecessary data and reports that don’t help them make decisions.

The target/trend report is just one type of decision-based report. You can create your own reports that are much more specific to the types of decisions you make. The key is to work backward from the decision and action. When you do, you will have decision-driven data that will be much more effective for supporting data-driven decisions.

---------------
Brad Kolar is the President of Kolar Associates, a leadership consulting and workforce productivity consulting firm. He can be reached at brad.kolar@kolarassociates.com.

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Scrap your action plans. Consider outcome plans instead

Are you an action planner? Do you make sure that you leave every meeting with a clear list of actions, responsibilities, and due dates? If so, you are probably getting a lot done. But here’s the question: Are you achieving anything?

Getting things done is about completing activities. Achieving something is about creating positive changes to your business. In many organizations, these two ideas get confused.

After a workshop on expectation setting and clarity, one leader listed two “action items” on her follow up plan:
Create team expectations
Talk with team about expectations
Both actions had due dates. The leader took accountability for achieving them. The due date arrived and both actions were complete. A month later, she called me to say that her team still didn’t seem to “get it”.

The plan let her off the hook too early. After completing the two activities (and checking them off), she went on to other things.

Instead, things might have been different if she had an outcome-plan that said, “each team member is clear on my expectations.” It’s a subtle but important difference. Simply writing out team expectations and talking about them wouldn’t be sufficient. She’d have to confirm that her team understood the expectations. If they didn’t she’d need to take additional actions until they did.

It's true that she could have achieved the same thing with the actions if she simply followed up and adjusted as needed. While true, it’s not likely. The value of an action plan is also its potential liability. It creates focus. Leaders, especially busy leaders get so focused on achieving the plan, they lose sight of the bigger picture. They don’t take the time to check back to see if the result was achieved.

Outcome plans take advantage of the clarity and focus created by action plans. However, they change that focus to the end result rather than the activities. That might just be the edge that you need to ensure that what you do makes a difference.

Tips for creating outcome plans:

1) List outcomes! An outcome is a positive change to your business or people. Having a deliverable completed is not an outcome until someone or something is benefiting from it.  In that case case, the “benefit” is the real outcome and for what you should be striving.

2) Create sub-outcomes: If the overall outcome is too big, break it down into smaller outcomes so that you can track your progress. For example, while your overall outcome might be to reduce costs, one of your smaller outcomes might be to first get people working more efficiently.

3) Be aggressive but realistic – Outcomes sometimes take longer to achieve than actions so be realistic. However, be aggressive as well. If you set your outcomes too far into the future, nothing will get accomplished.

4) Don’t stretch the outcome date to accommodate the activities. Speed up the activities to reach the outcome quickly.

---------------------------------
Brad Kolar is the President of Kolar Associates, a leadership consulting and workforce productivity consulting firm. He can be reached at brad.kolar@kolarassociates.com.