Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

Expand Messages
  • Alan Meekings
    Stacey, You say, Strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning how we have decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen EVERYWHERE
    Message 1 of 10 , Jun 23, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Stacey,



      You say, "Strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning how we have
      decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen EVERYWHERE
      before measuring makes sense."



      Could you please say more about this, as this has not been my personal
      experience?



      Yours as ever,


      Alan

      _____

      From: perfmeas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
      Of Stacey Barr
      Sent: 24 June 2009 00:02
      To: perfmeas@yahoogroups.com
      Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)



      What exactly is strategy anyway? Isn't it just the same as how we have
      decided to change in order to pursue our chosen direction?

      It applies at any level - including the operational level - in an
      organisation, I think. There is no sense measuring anything, just because
      measuring seems like a good idea, or even just because there are things that
      can be improved.

      Measuring helps organisations (and the people within them) when it focuses
      people on making changes that do indeed take them in a direction they have
      consciously chosen to go.

      We talk a lot about measures that drive the wrong behaviour. If an
      operational team measures efficiency or timeliness or accuracy or
      reliability (whatever those turn out to be in a specific sense for the
      organisation), it will direct people's attention to those things. And while
      in theory they sound like good things to measure and focus on and improve,
      if doing this takes the organisation in a direction it should not go, then
      it's a bad idea.

      I guess I'm saying that strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning
      how we have decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen
      EVERYWHERE before measuring makes sense.

      So before working with the operational team to create measures, I believe
      first you ought to have a dialogue with them about what their direction
      should be (what do their stakeholders value most?) and what they believe are
      the biggest levers to take them in that direction (the results they are
      currently getting that need to be improved, and improving said results moves
      them along their chosen direction). Measure those levers.


      Smiles,

      Stacey Barr

      Web: <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceybarr.com/> rr.com/>
      http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceybarr.com> rr.com
      Email: <mailto:staceybarr@staceyba <mailto:staceybarr%40staceybarr.com>
      rr.com> staceybarr@staceyba <mailto:staceybarr%40staceybarr.com> rr.com

      _____

      From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
      Behalf
      Of Alan Meekings
      Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2009 07:31
      To: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      Subject: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

      Hello Robert,

      I think you're absolutely correct to observe that significant progress can
      be made at an operational level (rather than a strategic level),
      notwithstanding the absence of specific 'visions' or 'strategies'.

      Indeed, in my experience, many organisations waste lots of time inventing
      overly-sophisticated strategies without even having a basic understanding of
      real opportunities for improving how their work gets done or how their
      organisations are managed. Often their strategic aspirations and goals are
      completely disconnected from a proper understanding of operational and
      managerial improvement opportunities.

      In my experience, almost every organisation I've come across would benefit
      the application of a rigorous approach to organisational performance
      measurement and management (which, like you, I distinguish from individual
      performance management). Indeed, often the more you know about a particular
      organisation, the more you can see opportunities for improvement.

      The reality is that helping organisations to move forward in terms of
      organisational performance measurement and management doesn't necessarily
      require a huge investment in consultants' time or new software. But it
      certainly requires new thinking . . . wherever that comes from.

      It would be good to hear the thoughts and comments of other contributors to
      this forum.

      Regards,

      Alan

      _____

      From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
      Behalf
      Of Robert Wise
      Sent: 23 June 2009 14:16
      To: 'amey deshpande'; 'Krishnan D G'; perfmeas@yahoogroup
      <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

      To Amey Deshpande,

      You are on the right track when you distinguish between a system of
      performance measures to monitor organizational performance and one for
      monitoring individual performance. I am interested in the former. When you
      think of monitoring organizational performance, you can also distinguish
      between measuring at the strategy level and measuring at the operational
      level. Both levels are worth measuring.

      You say that a SME does not have a vision or a strategy. In this case they
      do not need or are not ready for measuring at the strategy level. And it
      would be backwards to try to make them develop a strategy just so they can
      measure it. I suggest you work with them at the operational level. Ask them
      what information they would like to have to better manage their business and
      make it more efficient.

      Robert I. Wise

      Washington DC

      From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
      [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
      Behalf
      Of amey deshpande
      Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:59 PM
      To: Krishnan D G; perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com>
      s.com
      Subject: Re: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

      Dear Mr.Krishnan,
      Thank you for your reply. Really appreciate it!

      However, want to clarify one thing. When we talk about performance
      management systems, are we talking about a strategy implementation system or
      employee appraisal system? Though one is linked to other, most literature
      refers to PMS as strategy implementation system, with appraisal systems only
      being a part of the whole.

      PMS starts with visioning/missioning and strategy formulation aligned to
      vision/mission. Once the strategy is formulated (that is we know 'what')
      then we get into the 'how' of it and then developing measures, targets and
      initiatives. Where the appraisal systems come is the targets and
      initiatives.

      However, in many of the SME's they do not have a visioning/missioning
      exercise. More importantly they do not have the management bandwidth to
      think strategically. They are more operational in outlook because of the
      many characteristics mentioned in the previous mail. (many of them say that
      the cost of PMS is unreasonable vis-a-vis the benefit accruing) They are too
      small to have a full fledged system.

      I was just wondering if they could implement one. What would it look like?
      Thank you for your time ad efforts. Hoping to hear from you.
      Have a great day.
      Amey

      --- On Mon, 15/6/09, Krishnan D G <krishnanhr@rediffma
      <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com> il.com
      <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com> > wrote:

      From: Krishnan D G <krishnanhr@rediffma <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com>
      il.com
      <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com> >
      Subject: Re: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)
      To: ameysd9@yahoo. <mailto:ameysd9%40yahoo.co.in> co.in
      <mailto:ameysd9%40yahoo.co.in>
      Date: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 1:20 PM

      Dear Mr. Amey Deshpande,

      Due to time constrain I am not able to write to you in detail, however I
      will try to mention what I have in mind by asking a basic question, which is

      Why do we recommend a Performance Management system?

      To help to improve the performance of a person, by giving him fair and
      systematic feedback. The individual does get benfit out of this by knwoing
      which areas he need to improve.

      Doing so the company becomes more productive and efficient.

      From the Organization perceptive, it helps to measure systematically the
      contribution made by each person in the team and to reward the one who is
      doing well and to encourage the person who is not doing well to do better.

      Every business as ups and down and the company can only survive during the
      lean period when it is efficient and productive.

      Regards,

      Krishnan

      On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:52:11 +0530 wrote

      >Hello,

      >I am currently pursuing my Phd. performance measurement systems at the sri
      sathya sai university which is located in Puttaparthi, Andhra Pradesh,
      India. I am working on 'what does it take to implement a PMS in a small and
      medium sized enterprise (SME).

      >These are organizations which have the following general characteristics:

      >1. Usually family owned

      >2. Having one or few major clients to whom it supplies its products
      (typically auto ancillary, small chemical companies providing to large
      textile manufacturers, niche-software services providers etc)

      >3. Focussed predominantly on daily operations

      >4. their strategy is driven by their largest client (generally)

      >5. Small capital and wafer thin working capital margins

      >6. typically very less leveraged (that is almost all equity and no debt)

      >7. not listed on any stock exchanges (at best would be pvt. limited
      companies)

      >

      >For such organizations what would the PMS look like. Is it
      possible/necessary for them have one?

      >If yes, what would be the strongest reasons for them to have? (They are
      quiet happy with their current state and generally do not want to make the
      additional investment in a PMS.)

      >From where do they begin to make their PMS?

      >How do they fund it?

      >

      >These were some of the questions I face when talking to them. I am
      convinced they need it, but not able to convince them.

      >Sorry for the long mail.

      >Thanks a lot.

      >

      >Amey Deshpande

      >Research Scholar

      >School of Business Management

      >Sri Sathya Sai University,

      >Prashanthi Nilayam

      >contact no (M) +919440862146

      >

      >

      > Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with Yahoo! India
      Travel http://in.travel. <http://in.travel. <http://in.travel.
      <http://in.travel.yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/>
      yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/

      >

      >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      >

      >

      Love Cricket? Check out live scores, photos, video highlights and more.
      Click here http://cricket. <http://cricket. <http://cricket.
      <http://cricket.yahoo.com> yahoo.com>
      yahoo.com> yahoo.com

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Stacey Barr
      Alan (and anyone else interested), I don t believe you can meaningful measure things until you know if those things matter. For a measure to be meaningful, it
      Message 2 of 10 , Jun 23, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Alan (and anyone else interested),

        I don't believe you can meaningful measure things until you know if those
        things matter. For a measure to be meaningful, it has to track something
        that matters. And if that something isn't related to a consciously chosen
        strategy or direction, then it has a high likelihood of not mattering.

        A problem we have in our organisations is the measurement of too much
        trivial stuff - because the wrong reasons drove the choice of measures, such
        as:

        - it was easy to measure because we have the data already
        - "they" are measuring it so we should too
        - "they" told us to measure it (even though we're not sure why)
        - it's "obvious" to measure this

        Another way of expressing my point is that finding measures is not the first
        step. Deciding what matters enough to measure is the first step. And what
        matters has to relate to what is best for the business/company/organisation
        (this includes its customers and other stakeholders). If people don't know
        what is best for the business/company/organisation, then measuring things
        for other reasons has a very high potential to waste organisational
        resources and time by:

        - improving things that don't need to be improved
        - improving things that don't make any difference to the success of the
        organisation
        - improving things that cause other parts of the organisation to suffer (and
        thus sub-optimising the whole for the sake of a part)

        Did I answer the question you asked Alan? I'd love to hear more about your
        experience with this, particularly how it differs to my own views!


        Smiles,

        Stacey


        Web: <http://www.staceybarr.com/> http://www.staceybarr.com
        Email: <mailto:staceybarr@...> staceybarr@...


        _____

        From: perfmeas@yahoogroups.com [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
        Of Alan Meekings
        Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2009 13:01
        To: perfmeas@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)





        Stacey,

        You say, "Strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning how we have
        decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen EVERYWHERE
        before measuring makes sense."

        Could you please say more about this, as this has not been my personal
        experience?

        Yours as ever,

        Alan

        _____

        From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
        Behalf
        Of Stacey Barr
        Sent: 24 June 2009 00:02
        To: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

        What exactly is strategy anyway? Isn't it just the same as how we have
        decided to change in order to pursue our chosen direction?

        It applies at any level - including the operational level - in an
        organisation, I think. There is no sense measuring anything, just because
        measuring seems like a good idea, or even just because there are things that
        can be improved.

        Measuring helps organisations (and the people within them) when it focuses
        people on making changes that do indeed take them in a direction they have
        consciously chosen to go.

        We talk a lot about measures that drive the wrong behaviour. If an
        operational team measures efficiency or timeliness or accuracy or
        reliability (whatever those turn out to be in a specific sense for the
        organisation), it will direct people's attention to those things. And while
        in theory they sound like good things to measure and focus on and improve,
        if doing this takes the organisation in a direction it should not go, then
        it's a bad idea.

        I guess I'm saying that strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning
        how we have decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen
        EVERYWHERE before measuring makes sense.

        So before working with the operational team to create measures, I believe
        first you ought to have a dialogue with them about what their direction
        should be (what do their stakeholders value most?) and what they believe are
        the biggest levers to take them in that direction (the results they are
        currently getting that need to be improved, and improving said results moves
        them along their chosen direction). Measure those levers.

        Smiles,

        Stacey Barr

        Web: <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceybarr.com/>
        rr.com/> rr.com/>
        http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceybarr.com> rr.com>
        rr.com
        Email: <mailto:staceybarr@staceyba <mailto:staceybarr%40staceybarr.com>
        rr.com> staceybarr@staceyba <mailto:staceybarr%40staceybarr.com> rr.com

        _____

        From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
        Behalf
        Of Alan Meekings
        Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2009 07:31
        To: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        Subject: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

        Hello Robert,

        I think you're absolutely correct to observe that significant progress can
        be made at an operational level (rather than a strategic level),
        notwithstanding the absence of specific 'visions' or 'strategies'.

        Indeed, in my experience, many organisations waste lots of time inventing
        overly-sophisticated strategies without even having a basic understanding of
        real opportunities for improving how their work gets done or how their
        organisations are managed. Often their strategic aspirations and goals are
        completely disconnected from a proper understanding of operational and
        managerial improvement opportunities.

        In my experience, almost every organisation I've come across would benefit
        the application of a rigorous approach to organisational performance
        measurement and management (which, like you, I distinguish from individual
        performance management). Indeed, often the more you know about a particular
        organisation, the more you can see opportunities for improvement.

        The reality is that helping organisations to move forward in terms of
        organisational performance measurement and management doesn't necessarily
        require a huge investment in consultants' time or new software. But it
        certainly requires new thinking . . . wherever that comes from.

        It would be good to hear the thoughts and comments of other contributors to
        this forum.

        Regards,

        Alan

        _____

        From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
        Behalf
        Of Robert Wise
        Sent: 23 June 2009 14:16
        To: 'amey deshpande'; 'Krishnan D G'; perfmeas@yahoogroup
        <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

        To Amey Deshpande,

        You are on the right track when you distinguish between a system of
        performance measures to monitor organizational performance and one for
        monitoring individual performance. I am interested in the former. When you
        think of monitoring organizational performance, you can also distinguish
        between measuring at the strategy level and measuring at the operational
        level. Both levels are worth measuring.

        You say that a SME does not have a vision or a strategy. In this case they
        do not need or are not ready for measuring at the strategy level. And it
        would be backwards to try to make them develop a strategy just so they can
        measure it. I suggest you work with them at the operational level. Ask them
        what information they would like to have to better manage their business and
        make it more efficient.

        Robert I. Wise

        Washington DC

        From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
        [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
        Behalf
        Of amey deshpande
        Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:59 PM
        To: Krishnan D G; perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas%40yahoogroups.com>
        s.com
        Subject: Re: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

        Dear Mr.Krishnan,
        Thank you for your reply. Really appreciate it!

        However, want to clarify one thing. When we talk about performance
        management systems, are we talking about a strategy implementation system or
        employee appraisal system? Though one is linked to other, most literature
        refers to PMS as strategy implementation system, with appraisal systems only
        being a part of the whole.

        PMS starts with visioning/missioning and strategy formulation aligned to
        vision/mission. Once the strategy is formulated (that is we know 'what')
        then we get into the 'how' of it and then developing measures, targets and
        initiatives. Where the appraisal systems come is the targets and
        initiatives.

        However, in many of the SME's they do not have a visioning/missioning
        exercise. More importantly they do not have the management bandwidth to
        think strategically. They are more operational in outlook because of the
        many characteristics mentioned in the previous mail. (many of them say that
        the cost of PMS is unreasonable vis-a-vis the benefit accruing) They are too
        small to have a full fledged system.

        I was just wondering if they could implement one. What would it look like?
        Thank you for your time ad efforts. Hoping to hear from you.
        Have a great day.
        Amey

        --- On Mon, 15/6/09, Krishnan D G <krishnanhr@rediffma
        <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com> il.com
        <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com> > wrote:

        From: Krishnan D G <krishnanhr@rediffma <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com>
        il.com
        <mailto:krishnanhr%40rediffmail.com> >
        Subject: Re: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)
        To: ameysd9@yahoo. <mailto:ameysd9%40yahoo.co.in> co.in
        <mailto:ameysd9%40yahoo.co.in>
        Date: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 1:20 PM

        Dear Mr. Amey Deshpande,

        Due to time constrain I am not able to write to you in detail, however I
        will try to mention what I have in mind by asking a basic question, which is

        Why do we recommend a Performance Management system?

        To help to improve the performance of a person, by giving him fair and
        systematic feedback. The individual does get benfit out of this by knwoing
        which areas he need to improve.

        Doing so the company becomes more productive and efficient.

        From the Organization perceptive, it helps to measure systematically the
        contribution made by each person in the team and to reward the one who is
        doing well and to encourage the person who is not doing well to do better.

        Every business as ups and down and the company can only survive during the
        lean period when it is efficient and productive.

        Regards,

        Krishnan

        On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:52:11 +0530 wrote

        >Hello,

        >I am currently pursuing my Phd. performance measurement systems at the sri
        sathya sai university which is located in Puttaparthi, Andhra Pradesh,
        India. I am working on 'what does it take to implement a PMS in a small and
        medium sized enterprise (SME).

        >These are organizations which have the following general characteristics:

        >1. Usually family owned

        >2. Having one or few major clients to whom it supplies its products
        (typically auto ancillary, small chemical companies providing to large
        textile manufacturers, niche-software services providers etc)

        >3. Focussed predominantly on daily operations

        >4. their strategy is driven by their largest client (generally)

        >5. Small capital and wafer thin working capital margins

        >6. typically very less leveraged (that is almost all equity and no debt)

        >7. not listed on any stock exchanges (at best would be pvt. limited
        companies)

        >

        >For such organizations what would the PMS look like. Is it
        possible/necessary for them have one?

        >If yes, what would be the strongest reasons for them to have? (They are
        quiet happy with their current state and generally do not want to make the
        additional investment in a PMS.)

        >From where do they begin to make their PMS?

        >How do they fund it?

        >

        >These were some of the questions I face when talking to them. I am
        convinced they need it, but not able to convince them.

        >Sorry for the long mail.

        >Thanks a lot.

        >

        >Amey Deshpande

        >Research Scholar

        >School of Business Management

        >Sri Sathya Sai University,

        >Prashanthi Nilayam

        >contact no (M) +919440862146

        >

        >

        > Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with Yahoo! India
        Travel http://in.travel. <http://in.travel. <http://in.travel.
        <http://in.travel. <http://in.travel.yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/>
        yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/

        >

        >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        >

        >

        Love Cricket? Check out live scores, photos, video highlights and more.
        Click here http://cricket. <http://cricket. <http://cricket.
        <http://cricket. <http://cricket.yahoo.com> yahoo.com> yahoo.com>
        yahoo.com> yahoo.com

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • ameysd9@yahoo.co.in
        Dear all, It has been really interesting to read your wisdom on this topic. However, I thought it would be useful to put the whole into perspective so that we
        Message 3 of 10 , Jun 24, 2009
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear all,
          It has been really interesting to read your wisdom on this topic. However, I thought it would be useful to put the whole into perspective so that we could all gain from the collective wisdom. I thought, this could be useful through a hypothetical case study.

          Case study -
          ABC motor co. (hereafter referred to as ABC) is a major automobile manufacturer. It has been in this business for about 25 years. The company was founded by Abu Ben CadamĀ  who was a visionary innovator. ABC is now headed by his son, rookie, Ali Bill Cash. The company is mature and so is the industry. The industry is going through a major downturn and so is the company. Two years ago when everything was going hunky-dory, it had formulated its destination statement (mission) as 'to be the fifth largest producer of
          automobiles is the world' in 5 years. Currently, it is the 12th largest. Yes, it is stretch target. Its a highly competitive industry and much of
          its growth, its industry growth is decided by macro factors factors such as consumer price index, fuel costs etc.

          Its strength, traditionally, has been R&D and its opportunities lies predominantly in improving its marketing and sales. It operates through dealer networks and has strong presence in south asia.

          ABC has four product lines : the first variant is the low-end (800 cc, cost efficient aimed at sales guys, courier service guys, other road runners)
          the second is a mid-size SUV (800-1000 cc, power steering, windows etc etc) aimed at typically aimed at the college going kids, the young techies etc.
          the third is high end sedan for middle aged executives (1500-2000 cc)
          the fourth is transport trucks but lower cc ones. they are useful for retailers in transporting their merchandize, farmers to take their stock to market etc

          Each product has a different market, price, segment and therefore different strategy and
          therefore a different PMS.

          Now, the dealers are the face of their products. ABC has more than 1000 dealers in 700 cities around south asia. Dealer relationship is most vital for the success of their company. Though dealers are external to ABC, they are critical stakeholders. There position is tricky because they internal as well as external.

          ABC has more 1000 suppliers providing them everything from engine manufacturing components to interior fabricators. There operations are also critical for the performance of ABC.

          Questions:
          The case may not be comprehensive but sure is a good starting point.
          Could we please discuss strategy and PMS from this company point of view.
          One starting pointing could what are the strategic options that ABC has.
          Differentiate its products
          Become the most cost efficient
          Become a niche player
          Become a jack of all
          Be a first mover (keep innovating)
          Be a challenger (challenge the
          competitor; essentially opposite of first mover)

          COnsidering each one or any one of them could we develop a strategy and therefrom a PMS.

          Disclaimer: This company is a purely fictitious one and any resemblance with any real company is purely coincidental and unintentional.

          This will really help us discuss strategy and PMS with an almost real life case study.
          Hope this is useful.

          Apologise for the long mail. Really looking forward to a great trip.
          Thanks.
          Ameya


          --- On Wed, 24/6/09, Stacey Barr <staceybarr@...> wrote:

          From: Stacey Barr <staceybarr@...>
          Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)
          To: perfmeas@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Wednesday, 24 June, 2009, 9:35 AM

















          Alan (and anyone else interested),



          I don't believe you can meaningful measure things until you know if those

          things matter. For a measure to be meaningful, it has to track something

          that matters. And if that something isn't related to a consciously chosen

          strategy or direction, then it has a high likelihood of not mattering.



          A problem we have in our organisations is the measurement of too much

          trivial stuff - because the wrong reasons drove the choice of measures, such

          as:



          - it was easy to measure because we have the data already

          - "they" are measuring it so we should too

          - "they" told us to measure it (even though we're not sure why)

          - it's "obvious" to measure this



          Another way of expressing my point is that finding measures is not the first

          step. Deciding what matters enough to measure is the first step. And what

          matters has to relate to what is best for the business/company/ organisation

          (this includes its customers and other stakeholders) . If people don't know

          what is best for the business/company/ organisation, then measuring things

          for other reasons has a very high potential to waste organisational

          resources and time by:



          - improving things that don't need to be improved

          - improving things that don't make any difference to the success of the

          organisation

          - improving things that cause other parts of the organisation to suffer (and

          thus sub-optimising the whole for the sake of a part)



          Did I answer the question you asked Alan? I'd love to hear more about your

          experience with this, particularly how it differs to my own views!





          Smiles,



          Stacey



          Web: <http://www.staceyba rr.com/> http://www.staceyba rr.com

          Email: <mailto:staceybarr@staceyba rr.com> staceybarr@staceyba rr.com



          _____



          From: perfmeas@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:perfmeas@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf

          Of Alan Meekings

          Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2009 13:01

          To: perfmeas@yahoogroup s.com

          Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)



          Stacey,



          You say, "Strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning how we have

          decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen EVERYWHERE

          before measuring makes sense."



          Could you please say more about this, as this has not been my personal

          experience?



          Yours as ever,



          Alan



          _____



          From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          [mailto:perfmeas@ yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com] On

          Behalf

          Of Stacey Barr

          Sent: 24 June 2009 00:02

          To: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)



          What exactly is strategy anyway? Isn't it just the same as how we have

          decided to change in order to pursue our chosen direction?



          It applies at any level - including the operational level - in an

          organisation, I think. There is no sense measuring anything, just because

          measuring seems like a good idea, or even just because there are things that

          can be improved.



          Measuring helps organisations (and the people within them) when it focuses

          people on making changes that do indeed take them in a direction they have

          consciously chosen to go.



          We talk a lot about measures that drive the wrong behaviour. If an

          operational team measures efficiency or timeliness or accuracy or

          reliability (whatever those turn out to be in a specific sense for the

          organisation) , it will direct people's attention to those things. And while

          in theory they sound like good things to measure and focus on and improve,

          if doing this takes the organisation in a direction it should not go, then

          it's a bad idea.



          I guess I'm saying that strategy - in the generic sense of the word, meaning

          how we have decided to change to pursue our chosen direction - has to happen

          EVERYWHERE before measuring makes sense.



          So before working with the operational team to create measures, I believe

          first you ought to have a dialogue with them about what their direction

          should be (what do their stakeholders value most?) and what they believe are

          the biggest levers to take them in that direction (the results they are

          currently getting that need to be improved, and improving said results moves

          them along their chosen direction). Measure those levers.



          Smiles,



          Stacey Barr



          Web: <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceyba rr.com/>

          rr.com/> rr.com/>

          http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceyba <http://www.staceyba rr.com> rr.com>

          rr.com

          Email: <mailto:staceybarr@ staceyba <mailto:staceybarr% 40staceybarr. com>

          rr.com> staceybarr@staceyba <mailto:staceybarr% 40staceybarr. com> rr.com



          _____



          From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          [mailto:perfmeas@ yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com] On

          Behalf

          Of Alan Meekings

          Sent: Wednesday, 24 June 2009 07:31

          To: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          Subject: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)



          Hello Robert,



          I think you're absolutely correct to observe that significant progress can

          be made at an operational level (rather than a strategic level),

          notwithstanding the absence of specific 'visions' or 'strategies' .



          Indeed, in my experience, many organisations waste lots of time inventing

          overly-sophisticate d strategies without even having a basic understanding of

          real opportunities for improving how their work gets done or how their

          organisations are managed. Often their strategic aspirations and goals are

          completely disconnected from a proper understanding of operational and

          managerial improvement opportunities.



          In my experience, almost every organisation I've come across would benefit

          the application of a rigorous approach to organisational performance

          measurement and management (which, like you, I distinguish from individual

          performance management). Indeed, often the more you know about a particular

          organisation, the more you can see opportunities for improvement.



          The reality is that helping organisations to move forward in terms of

          organisational performance measurement and management doesn't necessarily

          require a huge investment in consultants' time or new software. But it

          certainly requires new thinking . . . wherever that comes from.



          It would be good to hear the thoughts and comments of other contributors to

          this forum.



          Regards,



          Alan



          _____



          From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          [mailto:perfmeas@ yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com] On

          Behalf

          Of Robert Wise

          Sent: 23 June 2009 14:16

          To: 'amey deshpande'; 'Krishnan D G'; perfmeas@yahoogroup

          <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          Subject: RE: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)



          To Amey Deshpande,



          You are on the right track when you distinguish between a system of

          performance measures to monitor organizational performance and one for

          monitoring individual performance. I am interested in the former. When you

          think of monitoring organizational performance, you can also distinguish

          between measuring at the strategy level and measuring at the operational

          level. Both levels are worth measuring.



          You say that a SME does not have a vision or a strategy. In this case they

          do not need or are not ready for measuring at the strategy level. And it

          would be backwards to try to make them develop a strategy just so they can

          measure it. I suggest you work with them at the operational level. Ask them

          what information they would like to have to better manage their business and

          make it more efficient.



          Robert I. Wise



          Washington DC



          From: perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com

          [mailto:perfmeas@ yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com] On

          Behalf

          Of amey deshpande

          Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:59 PM

          To: Krishnan D G; perfmeas@yahoogroup <mailto:perfmeas% 40yahoogroups. com>

          s.com

          Subject: Re: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)



          Dear Mr.Krishnan,

          Thank you for your reply. Really appreciate it!



          However, want to clarify one thing. When we talk about performance

          management systems, are we talking about a strategy implementation system or

          employee appraisal system? Though one is linked to other, most literature

          refers to PMS as strategy implementation system, with appraisal systems only

          being a part of the whole.



          PMS starts with visioning/missionin g and strategy formulation aligned to

          vision/mission. Once the strategy is formulated (that is we know 'what')

          then we get into the 'how' of it and then developing measures, targets and

          initiatives. Where the appraisal systems come is the targets and

          initiatives.



          However, in many of the SME's they do not have a visioning/missionin g

          exercise. More importantly they do not have the management bandwidth to

          think strategically. They are more operational in outlook because of the

          many characteristics mentioned in the previous mail. (many of them say that

          the cost of PMS is unreasonable vis-a-vis the benefit accruing) They are too

          small to have a full fledged system.



          I was just wondering if they could implement one. What would it look like?

          Thank you for your time ad efforts. Hoping to hear from you.

          Have a great day.

          Amey



          --- On Mon, 15/6/09, Krishnan D G <krishnanhr@ rediffma

          <mailto:krishnanhr% 40rediffmail. com> il.com

          <mailto:krishnanhr% 40rediffmail. com> > wrote:



          From: Krishnan D G <krishnanhr@ rediffma <mailto:krishnanhr% 40rediffmail. com>

          il.com

          <mailto:krishnanhr% 40rediffmail. com> >

          Subject: Re: [perfmeas] PMS in SMEs (From India)

          To: ameysd9@yahoo. <mailto:ameysd9% 40yahoo.co. in> co.in

          <mailto:ameysd9% 40yahoo.co. in>

          Date: Monday, 15 June, 2009, 1:20 PM



          Dear Mr. Amey Deshpande,



          Due to time constrain I am not able to write to you in detail, however I

          will try to mention what I have in mind by asking a basic question, which is



          Why do we recommend a Performance Management system?



          To help to improve the performance of a person, by giving him fair and

          systematic feedback. The individual does get benfit out of this by knwoing

          which areas he need to improve.



          Doing so the company becomes more productive and efficient.



          From the Organization perceptive, it helps to measure systematically the

          contribution made by each person in the team and to reward the one who is

          doing well and to encourage the person who is not doing well to do better.



          Every business as ups and down and the company can only survive during the

          lean period when it is efficient and productive.



          Regards,



          Krishnan



          On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 11:52:11 +0530 wrote



          >Hello,



          >I am currently pursuing my Phd. performance measurement systems at the sri

          sathya sai university which is located in Puttaparthi, Andhra Pradesh,

          India. I am working on 'what does it take to implement a PMS in a small and

          medium sized enterprise (SME).



          >These are organizations which have the following general characteristics:



          >1. Usually family owned



          >2. Having one or few major clients to whom it supplies its products

          (typically auto ancillary, small chemical companies providing to large

          textile manufacturers, niche-software services providers etc)



          >3. Focussed predominantly on daily operations



          >4. their strategy is driven by their largest client (generally)



          >5. Small capital and wafer thin working capital margins



          >6. typically very less leveraged (that is almost all equity and no debt)



          >7. not listed on any stock exchanges (at best would be pvt. limited

          companies)



          >



          >For such organizations what would the PMS look like. Is it

          possible/necessary for them have one?



          >If yes, what would be the strongest reasons for them to have? (They are

          quiet happy with their current state and generally do not want to make the

          additional investment in a PMS.)



          >From where do they begin to make their PMS?



          >How do they fund it?



          >



          >These were some of the questions I face when talking to them. I am

          convinced they need it, but not able to convince them.



          >Sorry for the long mail.



          >Thanks a lot.



          >



          >Amey Deshpande



          >Research Scholar



          >School of Business Management



          >Sri Sathya Sai University,



          >Prashanthi Nilayam



          >contact no (M) +919440862146



          >



          >



          > Explore and discover exciting holidays and getaways with Yahoo! India

          Travel http://in.travel. <http://in.travel. <http://in.travel.

          <http://in.travel. <http://in.travel. yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/>

          yahoo.com/> yahoo.com/



          >



          >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          >



          >



          Love Cricket? Check out live scores, photos, video highlights and more.

          Click here http://cricket. <http://cricket. <http://cricket.

          <http://cricket. <http://cricket. yahoo.com> yahoo.com> yahoo.com>

          yahoo.com> yahoo.com



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





























          ICC World Twenty20 England '09 exclusively on YAHOO! CRICKET http://cricket.yahoo.com

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Alan Meekings
          Members of this forum may be interested in subscribing to the PMA Forum on Yahoo Groups as well. If you go to www.yahoogroups.com
          Message 4 of 10 , Jun 25, 2009
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Members of this forum may be interested in subscribing to the PMA Forum on
            Yahoo Groups as well.



            If you go to www.yahoogroups.com <http://www.yahoogroups.com/> and enter
            "PMA Forum" in the search bar, you can easily subscribe by clicking on the
            PMA icon.



            There's a lively debate currently underway on the PMA Forum at the moment
            that may interest perfmeas members.



            Regards,



            Alan



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.