“But we are a RESULTS-based-performance company,” Lisa pushed back.

“Does that mean you get a trophy because your team made goal in spite of your managerial incompetence?” I asked. Then smiled. “Just kidding.”

I could see the blood return to Lisa’s face.

“A plan, or a goal is simply a proclamation of your intention,” I continued. “No one knows, for certain, if that goal will, in fact, be achieved. The only measure of performance is performance. While the end result is certainly a metric, it is your effectiveness that I will watch.”

“Not sure I understand,” Lisa replied.

“Sometimes, not often, but sometimes, we achieve a result through no good efforts of our own. We are carried to the goal by momentum, or luck, positioned just right in the flow by random fate. Can I judge your effectiveness, positive or negative based on the fact of the result, or should I more properly examine the moves you made?”

Odd, Lisa was still listening.

“More often, the opposite happens. We have intentions to make our numbers, but the environment turns hostile, we fight with the alligators and do our best to make lemonade. Can I judge your effectiveness, positive or negative based on the fact of the result, or should I more properly examine the moves you made?”

I trust each of you had an enjoyable Thanksgiving, ate way too much dessert and are now fully satiated and ready to get back to work.

I am currently working with an online class, its latest focus on the planning process. It is that time of year, where all things turn to goals and objectives for the coming year, thinking that we will outdo ourselves in that optimistic quest.

And yet, if don’t achieve those (sometimes) elusive goals, we likely blame a variety of factors outside of our control, thinking, how could we possibly be held accountable for those external elements?

Here are my assumptions –

• I assume that you will do your best.
• I assume, that, in doing your best, you will study those external factors outside of your control, to determine what influence that might have on your accomplishments.
• I assume that you will create alternate paths, contingencies to be adjusted when those external forces exert their influence.

At the end of the day (year) I will not judge you on your results. I will judge you on your effectiveness. This means, no excuses, for circumstances outside of your control. How will you effectively anticipate and plan for those inevitable contingencies?

“You’ve seen my workload,” Rene complained. “I have a ton of management issues I am dealing with. As Vice President of this division, I have a lot on my plate.”

“And one of the things on your plate is the hiring of a new supervisor in one of your production departments,” I replied.

“Yes, but don’t hang that one on me. I have a manager in that department. It’s his responsibility to make the hire. The less I get involved the better,” Rene resisted.

“Tell me, Rene, why is that supervisor role open, anyway?”

She saw the question behind the question, and smiled. “You know the last person didn’t work out, and yes, I stayed out of that hiring decision, too.”

“And, in your role as VP, as the manager of the person who made the poor hiring decision, who do I hold accountable?” I asked.

“Well, I guess, since you are sitting in my office, that would be me.”

From the Ask Tom Mailbag:

Question:
I have an IT person, very skilled in technology, but seemingly unable to look beyond next week. He is brilliant at solving network issues, working around this problem and solving that issue. But his backlog of projects is growing. It appears he is unable to prioritize or track progress on any project longer than one or two days. We have temporarily assigned him to report to one of our senior managers, she’s very organized, to try to keep him focused. Together, they have created tracking spreadsheets, and meet once a week to update the status on projects. But the more time goes by, the more out of control things get. The value we deliver to our clients depends on our technology, so this truly has my attention.

Response:
If this role was simply to keep your computer network afloat, wouldn’t be a big deal, but you describe this as mission critical. You describe requirements for two distinct roles. One role is technical, directly performing task assignments (direct output), and one role making decisions about priorities, sequence and allocation of resources. You might find both in the same person (if you had the budget), but that is not the case. You have two individuals, which you describe as competent.

Here’s the rub. Who is the manager of the IT person. Like many companies, computers and their networks are so mystical that IT personnel are allowed to roam free, with only vague accountability. The evidence of vague accountability, is that they often have no appropriate manager.

You described that you have a senior manager available, AND you will have to determine their interest in being the manager of the IT person, but here is the difference. Your move is to shift accountability to this senior manager. It is not a matter of the IT person reporting to this senior manager, but this senior manager being accountable for the direct output of the IT person.

This subtle shift in accountability makes all the difference. You see, I don’t know if they need to meet once a week or twice a day. That’s not my decision. That is a decision for the senior manager. And the senior manager will only make the right decision with the understanding that she is accountable for the output of the IT person. This is a game changer.