|
|
Chapter 3: Putting Results Management into Practice
Making
the transformation to a true results orientation is challenging in virtually
all well-established organizations. Technology and management information
systems may need to be significantly upgraded, and staff must greatly
improve their knowledge of results management.
The process of becoming results focused requires the understanding and
commitment of top management, a supportive organizational culture, and
staff incentives that prioritize achieving results rather than conforming
to particular business processes. In short, results management has major
implications for the organization. Box 2 presents some of the implications
of results management for organizational reform and change.
| Box 2: Reform Aspects of Results Management |
| Accountability. Committing to results management
requires that management and staff be held accountable for appropriate
levels of results. |
| Client focus. Achieving results is
linked to understanding stakeholders’ perspectives and needs;
thus, there is a significant emphasis on participatory processes and
ensuring that the organization is responsive to the needs of beneficiaries. |
| Streamlined business processes. In order to achieve
results, traditional organizations must make important changes to
their operational policies and procedures to increase efficiency,
improve the allocation of resources, and enhance transparency. |
| Decentralization. Responsiveness implies
delegating authority to accountable staff and then empowering them
to do their jobs. |
| Working in strategic partnerships. Involving partners
and stakeholders in results management is essential. In the context
of development work at the country level, development partners must
harmonize their activities among themselves and ensure that the collective
results of their efforts are aligned with country-owned development
objectives. |
| Staff incentives and training. Managing
for results represents a fundamentally different way of doing business.
Traditional incentive systems reward activities and processes rather
than achievements and results. Results management requires that staff
be rewarded on the basis of measured results and that they be supported
with solid training programs, performance information databases, toolkits,
mentoring, and other resources. |
| Organizational change. Any organization has its
own culture characterized by implicit and explicit values, behavioral
expectations, customs and rituals, and terminology. Implementing results
management requires that the organizational culture be transformed
to support results orientation. Organizations that make a successful
transition to results management are often those that are able to
manage this challenging transformation effectively. |
 Top
Making the transition to results management requires a long-term organizational
commitment, with management taking on a strong leadership role. It involves
important changes in organizational culture—changes that must be
proactively managed (see Box 3). It also requires an appropriate enabling
environment, in particular management and information systems that allow
results management to blossom.
| Box 3: Reform Aspects of Results Management |
- readiness to think and act across boundaries
|
|
- organizational flexibility
|
- openness to innovation and creativity
|
- ability to capitalize on windows of opportunity, to tolerate
mistakes and to manage risk
|
- capacity to build strategic alliances, collaboration, and trust
and to negotiate to achieve joint outcomes
|
- adaptability to changing circumstances
|
|
- encouragement of diverse views and awareness of and appreciation
of different cultures
|
- capacity to balance the tension between short-term and long-term
goals
|
- effective knowledge management
|
Leadership. Management’s role is to set out a
clear, easily understood vision of the organization’s results. Without
the full support of senior management and without a clear articulation
of that commitment to staff, there is little chance that the necessary
organizational changes can be made. Management must actively support and
visibly participate in all phases of implementing results management.
Organizational culture. Merely articulating a commitment
to results management is not enough. Success depends substantially on
developing a results-oriented organizational culture. The public sector’s
traditional emphasis on administrative procedures and inputs is deeply
ingrained. Moving to results management requires nurturing a mindset that
focuses on actively managing inputs and outputs to achieve outcomes.
Supporting systems. Implementing results management
requires reliable systems to ensure collection, encoding, analysis, and
reporting of performance data. Weaknesses in many organizations are especially
evident in reporting performance information and using it for decision
making and learning. One of the primary benefits of results management
is the ability to generate real-time feedback to improve the quality of
decision making. An integrated approach to knowledge management and sharing
information is essential to achieve this.
Top
Managing for results requires in-depth analysis, careful planning, and
clear focus. This process can be visualized as an ongoing cycle involving
eight phases (see figure at right) that proceed in a logical sequence,
though there may also be some movement back and forth and a need to revisit
various phases as work proceeds. Results management requires flexibility,
but flexibility within the context of a sound strategic planning cycle.
Phase 1: Strategic planning and resource allocation.
The origin of the term strategy lies in the Greek word strategos,
used to describe the broad sweep of conducting military campaigns and
foreign policy among city-states. Over the intervening centuries, the
term “strategy” retained its association with the battlefield
and military operations. By the late 20th century, however, the term had
been widely adapted in management literature, and “strategic planning”
came into its own as a corporate tool. As part of the continuing evolution
in public sector management, progressive government agencies and development
organizations are now fully committed to strategic planning.
Initially, it is important to carry out a comprehensive scan of the organization
to understand the internal (organizational) and external environments
as fully as possible. Various acronyms have been used to describe this
analysis, including “PEST” (political, economic, social, and
technical environments) and “SWOT” (strength, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats). Whatever method is employed, good strategic
analysis addresses key questions such as the following.
- Where have we been, and where are we now?
- Where will we be in the future if we continue on our present course?
- Where do we want to be in 3 years? In 5 years?
- How do we get from point A (now) to point B (the 3- or 5-year end
point)?
- How will we know when we have arrived?
The precise form taken by strategic planning will vary depending on the
organization’s culture, leadership, complexity, size, and mission.
Strategic planning, which usually refers to a 3-5 year timeframe, normally
improves an organization’s capacity to achieve results. Strategic
planning for results requires particular attention to linkages between
strategic objectives and the bottom-line budget. What financial resources
are required to implement the plan? How will the money be spent and how
will the expended financial resources contribute to desired results?
Phase 2: Selecting indicators and targets. The first
step in operationalizing the strategy is to develop sound indicators and
targets as these are the keys to knowing when you are making measurable
progress toward desired results. This process is grounded in the results
framework which provides an overview and quick summary of cause-and-effect
relationships and allows differentiation of inputs, outputs, outcomes,
and ultimately impacts. By understanding these relationships, it becomes
possible to “work backwards” to develop appropriate and reliable
performance indicators. Indicators measure progress on a quantitative
scale. Examples include literacy rates, agricultural productivity/crop
yields, and child mortality ratios. In each case, the indicator measures
progress towards the outcome reflecting the desired result.
Once indicators have been identified, baseline values need to be collected
for each indicator before project activities begin. A solid baseline is
essential for measuring and monitoring of subsequent progress to be effective.
Having good baseline data is also essential for setting explicit targets,
i.e. particular values for an indicator to be achieved within a clearly
defined timeframe.
Perhaps most important is that indicators are based on valid and reliable
data and that they are intuitively useful to managers. Indicators should,
to the extent possible, conform to the “SMART” paradigm; specific,
measurable, attainable, realistic,
time-bound. When these criteria are met, well-informed management
decisions can be made.
Phase 3: Establishing responsibility and accountability. An
important prerequisite before implementing the strategy is to reach consensus
on responsibility and accountability at all levels. The effective delegation
of authority is essential. If staff are to be held accountable for the
results they achieve, they must be clearly empowered and given the authority
they need to get the job done. Such empowerment is generally achieved
by progressive human resource management that allows for flexibility in
determining how staff do their jobs, while simultaneously giving priority
to measuring, monitoring, and managing results.
Performance improves when the staff members who actually do the work
have authority and responsibility delegated directly to them. This type
of delegation goes beyond the traditional rationale based on effectiveness
or efficiency and requires a major rethinking of management systems and
practices.
Phase 4: Measuring performance and results. Effectively
implementing results management requires that performance be measured
at all levels of the organization. In general, monitoring systems should
be designed using available data sources while avoiding duplicating other
management systems. It is also important at the outset to determine the
frequency of monitoring.
Phase 5: Analyzing performance and results information.
Analyzing performance and results data is essential for effectively monitoring
and managing programs and projects. Measuring and monitoring data involves
an iterative process of assessment, comparison, and interpretation. After
the data are analyzed, results must be interpreted with specific reference
to whether desired results are being achieved.
Phase 6: Using performance and results information.
Information on performance and results serves many purposes, including
management decision making, improving business processes, documenting
progress toward results, and reporting on organizational effectiveness
to stakeholders.
Phase 7: Reporting performance and results information
to stakeholders. It is important to specify who will use results information
and for what purposes. Other important issues include determining when
exactly the information will be required and what decision-making processes
need to be supported.
Phase 8: Getting feedback and inputs from stakeholders.
Dialogue with and feedback from stakeholders are essential to understand
the relevance and usefulness of performance information, feedback mechanisms,
and reports. This then forms the basis for the next round of planning
and implementation.
Chapter 4: Implementing Results Management:
Challenges and Opportunities
|
Publications 
Making
the transformation to a true results orientation is challenging in virtually
all well-established organizations. Technology and management information
systems may need to be significantly upgraded, and staff must greatly
improve their knowledge of results management.