Design

When you start to design the measurement process, there are primarily two things to consider. First, there is the extent to which the measurement is qualitative or quantitative. The second concern is are you measuring the process or outcome of the engagement? By pulling these two dimensions together, we can construct the matrix shown in Fig. 10.3. From this, four types of measurement are developed that can be used to confirm progress.

Quantitative outcomes

Against this, it would be practical to set many of the factors that may have contributed to the approval for investment in the strategic engagement. For example, the number of people undertaking external training programmes, cost of internal workshops, increase in intellectual capital, etc. However, this is a dangerous measure and one that is abused. The use of quantitative measures can lead to people trying to achieve the measures rather than trying to change the culture. It can also create a false sense of end goals, e.g. "well we meet the 75 per cent criteria so we can back off now". Finally, any manager with a degree of common sense can meet targets by simply juggling resources and spreadsheet data.

Quantitative process

This includes many of the standard project management measures: achievement of milestones, number of completed tasks, cost overrun, etc. As a tangible measure, it is very effective for keeping minds focused on the process of change and ensuring that resources are carefully managed. This is fine if the organization is installing a new computer system or building a new extension, but people are not plant or equipment. People are unpredictable and social change is uncertain. The idea of hard measures for the process is entirely correct but there has to be a degree of care to ensure that the measures do not become more important than the desired outcome. If this were to happen, the measures tend to take the focus away from the end goal and act as an attenuator that restricts the change and learning process. The old adage that "what gets measured gets done", often becomes "what gets measured gets bluffed".

Qualitative process

This approach is concerned with understanding how people feel about the engagement. It is driven by how people perceive the change at an intuitive and emotional level. The difficulty is that there is nothing that an accountant can really get a handle on to produce a cost benefit chart and little for the whole business to get a hold of to get a feel for the change. The only way that people can really get a feel for progress is by becoming a part of the change itself. In doing this they will also derive an intuitive appreciation of the progress made and where the change is heading. The key point is that businesses are not run for pleasure - they are run to maximize the profitability of shareholder investment. If shareholders cannot be satisfied that the investment is worthwhile, there is always a chance that any resources allocated to the engagement will be withdrawn.

Qualitative outcomes

This section is virtually the same as the qualitative process, except that it is concerned with the change in daily life as perceived by people in the business. These measures might be drawn from interviews with people after they have been through some experiential parts of the change initiative. They will help to understand how the deeper issues around the culture are transformed. One approach is to map people's perception of the changes in the cultural artefacts within the business against the stated outcomes.

The measurement process is a minefield. However, always remember that measurements exist to gauge progress, not to drive change. The push should come from people's desire to make the change and the pull should be driven by an agreed outcome, not the numbers on a spreadsheet.

Back pocket question Am I clear on the relationship between the qualitative and quantitative measures?