Performance Support

Performance is the result of activities which are both effective and efficient. In short this means doing the right things and doing them well. The purpose of performance support is to enable segments of the organization to monitor certain aspects of the their Solution-Centered Support adoption and determine areas where attention would be appropriate to enhance performance.

The desired results pursued by a support organization are in three specific areas, i.e., employee satisfaction, customer satisfaction, and cost per resolution. While these are desired results they are not results which can be pursued directly. They are called results because they are an outcome of activities in other areas. As the following diagram indicates these three results trend based on leading indicators, i.e., proficiency, average time to resolution, and productivity. What the diagram also attempts to depict is that the the leading indicators are the outcome of performance drivers, i.e., alignment, learning, and process. The whole idea is to determine specifically which activities on which to focus on to ensure that the leading indicators and results all continue to trend in the appropriate direction.

A short description of the implications of this diagram are provided below. For a more in depth description of this model please refer to Leading Indicators.

While there are almost an endless array of things an organization can measure, a fact to which most organizations are marvelous examples, the real task is to find that minimal set of things to measure which enables the organization to monitor its progress in the desired direction, i.e., the results, and serve as a foundation for asking the right questions regarding behaviors, i.e., performance drivers, to determine where focus should be applied to enhance the trends. As it turns out the leading indicators are most appropriate things to monitor. Maybe that's why they were called leading indicators in the first place.

The following is an example table for accumulating the data on a weekly basis. Weekly is considered the appropriate timeframe over which to monitor the leading indicators. Monitoring over a longer period is considered to provide too much opportunity for the organization to get of track without realizing it. Click spreadsheet for the actual excel spreadsheet that this table was taken from.

     

August 1st - 7th
   
 

Calls

Create

Reuse

% Part

Prof

ATR

Prod
Khan, Harry

0

0

0

0%

1.00

 

0.00

--Able, Tom

33

0

0

0%

0.00

4.00

8.25

--Thompson, Fred

22

0

0

0%

0.75

6.00

3.67

--Glick, Harvey

27

0

0

0%

0.60

3.50

7.71

--West, Sid

45

12

1

29%

1.00

4.50

10.00

Walker, Robert

37

12

0

32%

0.95

2.40

15.42

--Woster, Alfred

16

0

0

0%

0.65

6.50

2.46

--Banks, Jeff

45

0

0

0%

0.60

4.50

10.00

--Bruce, Henry

48

4

0

8%

0.85

3.24

14.81

Firestone, Jack

29

3

18

72%

1.00

4.20

6.90

--Carter, Bill

40

4

0

10%

1.00

3.60

11.11

--Morris, Greg

12

9

0

75%

0.75

7.10

1.69

--Thomas, Will

16

3

0

19%

0.00

3.60

4.44

--Baker, Ralph

7

0

0

0%

0.75

5.30

1.32

 

377

47

19

 

0.71

 

6.99

 

27

12%

5%

18%

22%

4.50

0.46

This table is laid out so that it is easy to determine which individuals are coaches and who they're responsible for coaching and the variables are defined as:

The real source of performance support is reviewing the data and determining what questions are appropriate to ask and then, what activities, or more specifically what behaviors, should be focused on during the following week.

One way to look at the numbers is to compare individual results with the group averages. For those individuals who are consistently performing above the group average it would be good to find out why as something might be learned that could aid the performance of others. For those performing below the group averages it is good to understand why before you decide what behaviors to focus on during weeks that follow.

A word of caution, if you drive the numbers you will get numbers, not results. The numbers are not the behavior, they are indicators of behavior and it is the behaviors that must be focused on. This is why the raw numbers should never be shred with individuals other than the coaches and the manager. If the raw data is shared with indivdiauls they will begin comparing themselves with each other, which is not what is desired. What is desired is for individuals to continue focusing on doing the right things and continually getting better at doing them. It is also advisable not to share the raw data with upper management - it will simply cause them to ask more questions than you want to answer.

One can't win tennis games by looking at the scoreboard.
One has to focus on playing the game.

This data captured over a period of weeks can be used to produce trend charts. These trend charts are appropriate for sharing with the group, and with upper management. Admittedly the data used to construct these trend charts was contrived, yet it was contrived to specifically to demonstrate what the group should expect to see over time.

The Team Performance chart indicates that as proficiency increases participation should increase, as participation increases creates should level off and and reuse should increase. The time frame over which this happens will depend on the call volume the group is handling and the extent of redundancy in that call volume.

The Leading Indicators chart shows that as proficiency increases productivity also increases and average time to resolution decreases. This is sort of a no-brainer expectation isn't it? The time frame over which this happens will depend on the call volume the group is handling and the extent of redundancy in that call volume and most importantly the rate at which the group's proficiency increases. Note that the timeframe of this trend is also highly dependent on the participation rate of the group.

theWay of Systems * Feedback * Musings
Copyright © 2004 Gene Bellinger