“You won’t lag behind because you’ll have the speed.
You’ll pass the whole gang and you’ll soon take the lead.
Wherever you fly, you’ll be best of the best.
Wherever you go, you will top all the rest.
Except when you don’t.
Because, sometimes, you won’t.”
- Dr. Seuss, Oh the Places You’ll Go!
The leaders we work with cook up amazing visions for change. We see some of the most ingenious management structures, product strategies, marketing plans, and mission statements. We find the leaders we work with have the best of intentions with the changes they design. What happens between intention and implementation is where things often go south. So, how do we better bridge the gap between great concept and effective execution? We believe that the key to bridging this gap is to know along the way if we are making progress (or not). Because the amount of energy and effort it takes to launch meaningful change in organizations makes it imperative that we have better metrics so that we don’t wait to find out that “sometimes, you won’t.”
The best metrics aren’t just focused on results; they provide insights that change behavior. If we want the change to stick, we need to establish barometers that help us to be predictive and course correct when off track. And I am not just talking about anecdotes from senior management or conjecture based on the “word on the street.” To monitor and guide change successfully, we must build hard metrics that measure:
- Whether we are motivating change
- If people are committing to the future
- Whether we are achieving progress along the way
- If our change is producing results
Motivating change: Even as an initial vision starts to come together for change, it is important to begin pressure testing it with audiences/stakeholders to understand whether it is a vision people can understand and get behind. Some of these measures are not even connected to the specific set of changes to be implemented, but more around their readiness for change. Are they tired of the status quo? Do they feel the pain of current state or the aspiration of something to come? Do they believe those who lead them bring a great understanding of what is required and the plan of how to get them there? Get answers to these questions ASAP or else your change will be grounded before it takes off.
Committing to the future: Once we move beyond the need for change and begin to build clarity on the “where to from here?” we shift to understanding readiness for the specific change. It is at this stage that we need to develop metrics that tell us whether people understand how they will be impacted by change (personally and professionally) and what they need from their leaders to personally enact their own journey. It is no longer a theoretical support of something new but becomes a specific commitment to action plans that align along a converging path.
Achieving progress: All great change devolves into an action plan at some point in time. And being able to measure the small steps along the way, as well as get advance warning when we are off track, or an unintended impact is occurring is critical. Many of the metrics that measure progress are project management based but there is also a set of more subjective ones that measure the capacity we are building (in our leadership, in our governance and decision making, in our ability to manage conflict and prioritize, etc.) that are important for true assessment forward motion and correcting when we veer off path.
Producing results: Perhaps the set of metrics we have to say the least about, because it is the one our leaders are most conditioned to focus on, are output metrics. But surprisingly we find organizations even with a broad understanding of how to comprehensively think about “winning” tend to get very unidimensional when it comes to the question of “are we there yet?” Financial metrics of performance cover concerns from almost all stakeholders but progress measured solely on it will leave a change effort flat.
In addition to thinking about individual metrics, and creating a scorecard to track them with, it is critical that we look at these metrics for change as viewed in their totality. The set of metrics needs to be balanced. You need to be able to gain insight into both the “hard stuff” and the “soft stuff” of organization life. And perhaps it goes without saying that all of these metrics need to be integrated. Diverse, balanced streams of data are of little use if analyzed in isolation; much of the insight these data provide into the functioning of the organization comes only after a process of synthesis and interpretation. Lastly, they must be sensitive. You have to have access to responsive, leading indicators that inform about developing problems. This requires an understanding of the logic chain that connects leading and lagging indicators of performance and also demands comfort with “fuzzier,” more subjective data. And with these metrics on board, your organization wherever you fly, you’ll be best of the best. Wherever you go, you will top all the rest.