Performance Management: A Cure for Strategy Implementation Failure
By Gary Cokins, Global Product Marketing Manager, SAS Institute Inc.
Enterprise performance management is now being adopted due to CEO failures to successfully implement their strategy plus needs to focus on more differentiated customer-service levels. Enterprise performance management integrates methodologies such as balanced scorecards, strategy maps, budgets, Activity-Based Costing (ABC), forecasts, CRM and resource capacity planning. It is not a process or a system, but rather an umbrella concept intended to align manager and employee behavior and limited resources to focus on the organization’s strategic priorities and objectives.
Strategic direction setting is
arguably the major responsibility of the Executive Team, whose
members must answer the question, “Where do we want to go?”
Then it becomes the job of the rest of the organization to help
determine the best path for executing the strategy. That is,
managers and employee teams should help executives answer the
question, “How are we going to get there?”
Which of these two answers is more important for long-term
organizational survival? Is it the first one about determining
strategic direction or the second one about strategy execution?
The consensus I hear is that answering the first question
correctly is more critical. Most people believe that good
organizational processes and effectiveness will never overcome
the adverse effects of a poor strategy. So, strategy formulation
by the executives (often aided by consultants) is vital for
organizational survival. However, a different type of problem
lies between defining a good strategy and having good business
processes. A problem remains to successfully ‘implement’ the
strategy – and this is a substantial problem.
Strategy execution is considered one of the major failures of
executive teams. At a recent conference, Dr. David Norton,
co-author of “The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into
Action,” reported, “Nine out of 10 organizations fail to
successfully implement their strategy…. The problem is not that
organizations don’t manage their strategy well; it is they do
not formally manage their strategy.” Empirical evidence confirms
that companies execute strategy poorly. Involuntary turnover of
North American CEOs in 2006 will beat the record high set just
the previous year. In defense of executives, they often
formulate good strategies – their problem is failure to execute
them.
Performance Management as a Solution
An increasingly popular framework that addresses the problem of
strategy execution failure is ‘performance management’ – an
abbreviated term sometimes referred to as corporate performance
management (CPM). To be clear, performance management is about
improving the performance of an overall enterprise and not
simply of individual employees.
To further clarify some misconceptions, performance management
is not a new management methodology that everyone now has to
learn, but rather it is a broad assemblage and integration of
‘existing’ improvement methodologies that managers and employee
teams are already familiar with. And most organizations have
already begun to implement some of the performance management
portfolio of methodologies. The problem is that organizations
have been implementing their improvement programs in silo-like
isolation of each other: A Six Sigma Program here, a customer
relationship management (CRM) project there. It is as if
managers live in parallel universes.
Performance management takes a much broader view. Performance
management is much more than just strategy, planning and
budgeting with an emphasis on measurements.
All these components have interdependencies, so we know they
should be integrated. They are like pieces of a tabletop jigsaw
puzzle that everyone knows somehow fit together; but the picture
on the box top is missing! Performance management provides that
picture of integration both technologically and socially.
Performance management makes executing the strategy everyone’s
job #1 – it makes employees behave like they are the business
owners.
How does performance management create value? One fundamental
thing performance management does is, it transforms
transactional data from operational systems into
decision-support information. For example, employee teams
struggle with questions like, “How do we increase customer
service levels, but without increasing our budget?” How can
employees answer that question from examining transaction data
from a payroll, procurement, general ledger accounting or ERP
system? They cannot. Those systems were designed for a different
purpose – short-term operating and control with historical
reporting to answer basic questions of “what happened?” By
transforming raw transactional data into decision-relevant
information enhanced with forecasts and predictive analytics,
performance management helps further answer the questions of
“why did it happen?” “what optional actions can then be taken?”
and “which of those alternative actions appears to be the best
for us?”
Performance management resolves the uncertainty of estimating
impacts and predicting outcomes. Predictive analytics shorten
the time to discover possible outcomes thereby lengthening the
time managers have to influence those outcomes. Professor Tom
Davenport of Babson College authored a January, 2006 “Harvard
Business Review” article proposing that the next differentiator
for an organization’s competitive advantage will be analytics.
He has coined the phrase, ‘competing on analytics’ and observes
that companies that dominate their markets are increasingly
aggressive analytic competitors. His premise is that change at
all levels has accelerated so much that reacting after-the-fact
is too late and risky. He asserts that organizations must
anticipate change to be pro-active rather than reactive
In summary, performance management is all about improvement –
synchronizing improvement in the value of customers with
economic value creation to stockholders and owners. Its scope is
obviously very broad, which is why performance management must
be viewed at an enterprise-wide level.
Why Is There Increasing Interest in Performance Management
There is no consensus as to what performance management is.
Different information technology research firms define it
differently. Different consulting firms and software vendors
describe it to fit their unique competencies rather than what
their customers may require. Since my impression is that most of
these organizations view performance management far too narrowly
– such as only better budgeting and control – my feeling is it
is better to discuss what performance management ‘does’ rather
than have arcane debates about defining what it ‘is.’
I argue that, organizations have been doing performance
management for decades – well before it received its recent
popular references in the media. Organizations have been doing
performance management arguably even before there were
computers! What then is the explanation for its emergence as a
popular buzz phrase now?
Some would argue that the reason performance management
regularly appears in the media has been due to the Information
Technology (IT) research firms observing that business
intelligence software vendors – the type with functionality more
towards data-mining and analyzing data rather than producing the
raw transactional data – were integrating the analytical
information across multiple departments. Others might argue the
increasing appearance of performance management at the
organizational level arose from the same IT research firms
observing those same business intelligence software vendors
providing strong combination suites of at-a-glance visual
dashboards and scoreboards. Further, these reporting tools are
now linked to strategy planning, managerial accounting, and
forecasting tools – and they are extremely scalable to handle
millions of records for products and customers.
These are certainly factors, but I believe the emergence of
performance management in the media and marketplace has deeper
root causes. A better way to understand what performance
management is about is to understand what problems it solves –
the immense forces on management. These include:
-
Failure by executives to execute their well-formulated
strategy as I earlier mentioned. CEO firings are at record
levels due to this frustration.
-
Lack of trust among managers to achieve results is an
increasing concern. Consequently, there is an escalation in
accountability of managers and employee teams for results
‘with’ consequences – more pay-for-performance compensation
programs.
- Change is constant. Increasing rapid decisions by
employees (without time for higher management input)
leveraging trade-off and predictive analytics and employees’
need to understand the executives’ strategy.
- Mistrust of the managerial accounting system and its
flawed and/or incomplete product, channel, and customer
profitability reporting. This is addressed, in part, with
adopting activity-based costing principles.
- Poor customer value management. Surveys report customer
retention as the CEO’s number one concern.
- Dysfunctional supply chain management with lack of trust
among the traditional adversarial relationships between
buyers and sellers along the chain who should ideally be
collaborating to attain mutual benefits.
- Balancing risk appetite with risk exposure to optimize
financial results with anticipatory risk mitigation actions.
- Unfulfilled Return On Investment (ROI) promises from
large transactional systems (e.g., enterprise requirements
planning or ERP). Performance management serves as value
multiplier unleashing the latent ROI.
Effective performance management technology goes well beyond
query and reporting – it addresses and resolves all of these
issues. The result is that, rather than just monitoring the
dials of its performance dashboards, organizations ‘move’ those
dials. The purpose of performance management is not just
managing, but ‘improving’ performance.
Poor customer value management is one of the forces listed above
that can rival poor strategy execution as a most compelling
reason for organizations to formalize performance management as
an integrated framework. So let’s discuss in greater depth
customer relationship management as one of the major components
in the portfolio of performance management.
Managing Customer Value: A Shift of Power from Sellers to
Buyers
The Internet, with its powerful search engines and near-instant
gratification, has irreversibly shifted power from sellers to
buyers. And every supplier of products and services is
scrambling to become more customer-focused. Organizations have
realized they must be increasingly focused on customers in order
to stay in business today. As a result, to survive businesses:
-
Need higher customer retention. It is relatively more expensive to acquire a new customer than to take the steps needed to retain an existing one.
- Shift away from simply producing commoditized products and toward value-added service differentiation for customers and prospects as the source of competitive advantage.
- Need to increase customer profitability through increasing the number of customer segments and better targeting efforts. Micro-level segmenting of customers helps business focus on customers’ unique preferences; a departure from traditional, spray-and-pray mass advertising and selling that has proven very little return.
These forces should not prevent organizations from attempting
to grow their business by acquiring new customers. But they
should balance their use of financial and manpower resources
between growing sales with higher-potential, existing customers
and acquiring high-profit customers who share similar
characteristics with their existing, high-profit customers.
The Internet has shifted power from suppliers to buyers because
shoppers can instantly view comparative pricing from a broad
range of vendors while collecting more information from
Web-based product and service-line resources. There are dozens
of different web-enabled purchasing experiences that you can
imagine and not just for consumers in households, but also for
purchasing agents in the virtual business-to-business (B2B)
marketplace. Buyers are no longer restricted to suppliers from
the local geography; now they can shop and order goods globally.
How can suppliers gain a competitive edge? Some suppliers
overreact by becoming customer-obsessed when they attempt to
transform themselves away from developing innovative new
products and services and motivating their sales forces to sell
them. Most eventually realize that they should work backwards by
first understanding the unique buyer preferences of the types of
customers and prospects they want to serve. There is a
difference between being customer-focused and customer-obsessed.
The latter approach may cast too wide a net and capture savvy,
high-maintenance, price-driven, non-loyal buyers who ultimately
yield little profit margin in the long term.
As a supplier increasingly micro-segments its customers and
sales prospects, the company will need more accurate
intelligence on the current and future potential profitability
of its products, standard service lines, channels and customers.
The idea here is not just to know ‘which types’ of customers to
retain, grow or acquire and which not to, but also ‘how much’ to
spend retaining, growing and acquiring the desired types. If you
bribe loyal customers and prospects with unnecessary deep
discounts and excessively costly differentiated services, or if
you neglectfully fall short with offerings or services to
non-loyal customers and prospects thus risking their
abandonment, then you destroy shareholder wealth. The spending
and investment of sales and marketing is ultimately a financial
optimization problem. This is why an effective managerial
accounting system, applying activity-based costing principles
used for customer lifetime value calculations, is another one of
the key components of the Performance Management portfolio of
methodologies.
Companies cannot succeed by standing still. If you are not
improving, then competitors will soon catch up to you. This is
one reason why Professor Michael E. Porter, author of the
seminal 1970 book on competitive edge strategies, “Competitive
Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors”,
asserted that an important strategic approach is continuous
differentiation of products and standard services to enable
premium pricing. Companies are now realizing that differentiated
service-levels to different customer micro-segments are critical
to shareholder wealth creation or destruction.
A Gathering Storm That Some Companies May Not Survive
A gathering storm appears to be headed for executives of
organizations in the developed economies of Western Europe, the
U.S. and Canada. At some risk of oversimplification, strategy is
all about shrewd investing and about differentiating products
and services to attain a competitive edge. Determining where to
spend money to yield financial returns above the cost of capital
is a perennial challenge. But a more difficult challenge facing
today’s executives is the speed at which competitors are now
evaluating and even replicating the differentiated products and
services of their industry’s innovators – and then possibly
upping the ante by offering their own additional
differentiation.
This gathering storm involves the rate at which companies invest
and how they organize to manage their human talent and
technology. Some companies appear to be ‘hitting a wall’ in both
areas. There is evidence that companies are under-investing in
their own business. A recent ‘New York Times’ editorial noted
that although American businesses are sitting on historically
large hoards of cash, they have reverted to paying higher
dividends and are buying up their own company shares “in record
quantities.” The editorial refers to a Standard & Poor’s
estimate that in 2005 the 500 companies in its S&P flagship
index would top their 2004 record in dividend payments and stock
share repurchases. Short-term thinking can jeopardize prospects
for becoming – or remaining – a long-term global competitor.
It is becoming increasingly difficult both to select high-return
investments and to identify differentiating tactics to sustain
competitiveness. But the surviving competitors must break
through the wall. To maintain the momentum necessary to invest
wisely and continuously differentiate, managers and employee
teams must have access to business intelligence. Increasingly,
it is intangible assets like employee skills and information
rather than tangible assets like equipment that generate
acceptable financial returns to shareholders.
Changes in the work force in developed economies also are a part
of the gathering storm. A recent McKinsey research paper reports
some eye-opening observations about the distribution of jobs in
developed economies of the G8 nations. For example, in the
United States roughly 80 percent of nonagricultural jobs involve
‘interactions’ (e.g., order-taking, scheduling, planning,
exchanging ideas, decision-making, etc.). The remaining 20
percent of non-farm workers occupy jobs that were prevalent in
the industrial revolution at the turn of the 20th century. These
workers extract raw materials, and make and assemble products.
This shift in the composition of the US workforce reflects the
outsourcing of jobs to lower wage developing countries, like
China and India, will continue into the future. Therefore
understanding ‘interaction’ jobs is important.
One surprise is that of the ‘interaction’ jobs, companies are
hiring fewer people for less-complex, lower-paying jobs (e.g.,
processing routine transactions) and more people for complex,
higher-paying jobs (e.g., exercising judgment). Less-complex
jobs, such as clerical positions that involve routine and
repetitive interactions, can be automated, shifted to customer
self-service (e.g., banks’ automated teller kiosks), or
outsourced to lower-wage developing countries. In contrast,
more-complex jobs, which economists refer to as ‘tacit
knowledge’ jobs, require high levels of judgment and an ability
to discern ambiguities, both of which are usually acquired
through experience and wisdom.
Evidence of this shift towards ‘tacit knowledge’ jobs can be
seen by examining the emerging roles in any company’s
organization chart. The Business Process Re-engineering (BPR)
movement certainly resulted in ‘de-layering,’ with removal of
supervisors, but supervisors have been replaced by perpetual
project teams, process coordinators and analysts. To paraphrase
the late actress Judy Garland, speaking as Dorothy to her dog
Toto in “The Wizard of Oz”, we are no longer in a familiar
place. This shift toward jobs that require complex interactions
has dramatic implications for how companies will compete and the
agility with which they can differentiate to sustain an ongoing
competitive edge.
But some companies are not shifting their job mix rapidly enough
toward more-complex tacit knowledge jobs. This slows their rate
of productivity improvement, customer-service-level
improvements, and new customer acquisition.
Executive teams that under invest company assets in their own
business and that fail to recognize the need for knowledge
workers seem to be suffering from mental gridlock. My belief is
that pursuing performance management can rescue these companies.
-
Predictive Analysis
As forecasting accuracy increases, uncertainty of the future
decreases. This leads to increased trust in decisions and
more firm commitments to see those decisions through. An
example in supply chain management is with better forecasts
of demand, suppliers carry lower inventory levels and
achieve higher throughput.
- Impact Analysis
As organizations become more complex, internal conflict and
tension, which are natural in organizational human dynamics,
grow. Decision-makers know there are always trade-offs among
customer-service levels, resource requirements, quality levels
and profits. They know that some decisions they make may help
their group but adversely affect others in their organization,
but they do not know who is affected or how severely. An example
is better coordination between marketing and operations when
sales campaigns require temporary build ups in product
inventory.
- Action-Ready Communications
Since the technologies that support the methodologies of
performance management are Web-enabled knowledge
interaction, employees can react immediately to unexpected
outcomes. They can discuss corrective actions with
co-workers by e-mail rather than waiting for
command-and-control supervisory instructions from managers
at higher levels. For example, if a workgroup is scoring
unfavorable to the target for their Key Performance
Indicator (KPI) in their balanced scorecard, individuals
from other workgroups may know what might be causing the
problem and send an e-mail describing their thoughts.
The technologies from the software providers of performance
management systems offer enablers that support these three
common threads to some degree. The leading software provides
robust statistical forecasting, what-if scenario analysis
(that provide causal models that describe how non-financial
factors affect financial results), and performance
measurement dashboards with alert messages and
communications imbedded ‘within’ the technologies.
Companies that are hitting a wall – by not investing or
spending prudently or adequately and by not developing
differentiating tactics – will find their survival is at
risk. In contrast, those businesses that empower their tacit
knowledge employees by providing them with business
intelligence from information technologies will break
through those walls and provide hope that shareholder wealth
will increase, not decrease.
What Differentiates Performance Management from Business
Intelligence (BI)
There are two things related to this topic that most managers
can agree upon:
-
BI involves raw data that must first be ‘integrated’
from disparate source systems and then ‘transformed’ into
information; and
- Performance management ‘leverages’ that
information. In this context, information is much more
valuable than data points, because integrating and
transforming data using calculations and pattern discovery
results in potentially meaningful information that can be
used for decisions.
An organization’s interest is not just to ‘monitor’ the dials; it is, more importantly, to ‘move’ the dials. That is, just reporting information does equate to managing for better results; what is needed is actions and decisions to improve the organization’s performance. To differentiate BI from performance management, performance management can be viewed as ‘deploying’ the power of BI, but the two are inseparable. Think of performance management as an ‘application’ of BI. Performance management adds context and direction for BI.
The collective suite of integrated methodologies that comprise performance management (e.g., strategy mapping, scorecards, customer value management, risk management, etc.) provides solutions. This list distinguishes a true performance management framework from non-integrated systems:
Understanding what performance management does is more
important than trying to define what it is.
Management’s Quest for a Complete Solution
Many organizations jump from improvement program-to-program
hoping that each new one may provide that big yet elusive
competitive edge. However, most managers would acknowledge that
pulling one lever for improvement rarely results in a
substantial change – particularly a long-term sustained change.
The key for improving is integrating and balancing ‘multiple’
improvement methodologies. In the end, organizations need
top-down guidance with bottom-up execution.
Organizations that are enlightened enough to recognize the
importance and value of their data often have difficulty in
actually ‘realizing’ that value. Their data is often
disconnected, inconsistent and inaccessible resulting from too
many non-integrated single-point solutions. They have valuable,
untapped data that is hidden in the reams of transactional data
they collect daily. Unlocking the intelligence trapped in
mountains of data has been, until recently, a relatively
difficult task to accomplish effectively.
Fortunately, innovation in data storage technology is now
significantly outpacing progress in computer processing power
heralding a new era where creating vast pools of digital data is
becoming the preferred solution. As a result, there are now
superior tools that offer a complete suite of analytic
applications and data models that enable organizations to tap
into the virtual treasure trove of information they already
possess, and enable effective performance management on a huge
scale. Performance management is the integration of these tools
and methodologies. The performance management solutions suite
provides the mechanism to bridge the business intelligence gap
between the CEO’s vision and employees’ actions.
Gary Cokins, CPIM, is Global Product Marketing Manager of
Performance Management Solutions with SAS. He is an
internationally recognized expert, speaker and author in
advanced cost management and performance improvement systems.
After earning an Industrial Engineering degree from Cornell
University in 1971 and an MBA from Northwestern University
Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Gary began his career as
a Financial Controller and Operations Manager with FMC Corp. He
worked 15 years as a Consultant at Deloitte, KPMG Peat Marwick
and Electronic Data Systems (EDS), where he headed EDS’ Cost
Management Consulting Services. Gary was the lead author of the
acclaimed “An ABC Manager’s Primer” sponsored by the Institute
of Management Accountants (IMA). His “Activity-Based Cost
Management: An Executive’s Guide” recently ranked as the
best-selling book of 151 titles on the topic. Gary’s other books
include “Activity-Based Cost Management: Making it Work”,
“Activity-Based Cost Management in Government”, and his latest
work, “Performance Management: Finding the Missing Pieces to
Close the Intelligence Gap. ” He has served on committees of
professional societies, including CAM-I, AICPA, the Supply Chain
Council, the American Society for Quality (ASQ), and the
Institute of Management Accountants (IMA). Gary is a member of
the editorial advisory board of the Journal of Cost Management.
He is an Instructor for the IMA, the Institute of Industrial
Engineers (IIE), and the Purchasing Management Association of
Canada (PMAC). For article feedback, contact Gary at
gary.cokins@sas.com
|