OPD Articles - Building better performance expectations.

Ask yourself: on a scale of 1-10, 10 being high, how effective are the staff in the business? Chances are you will offer a number between 6 and 7. If extra effort is put in by the leadership that can be lifted to perhaps 7.5 maybe as high as 8 for short periods, then when the extra effort stops, as it must, performance slides back to where it was that is about 6.5. Our research states that 65% is about as good as you will get with the current set of performance and HR tools; to achieve consistently better staff performance, without extraordinary leadership efforts requires much better thinking about how staff are supported to be successful and perform as well as they are able.

The definition of the complete manager is a person who identifies what people need to do to succeed then gains their commitment to do it every day as needed. I would add to the definition that when the complete manager sees their team at or near the standards required, they then raise the standard and gain acceptance of the increased standards in the team.

There are five key factors that crucially underlie top performance.

1.	Identifying the goals and outputs and ensuring they are linked tightly to strategy.
2.	Identifying the best practice/ideal behaviours that enable goal achievement.
3.	Identifying the business processes that support company wide goal achievement.
4.	Making sure people are clear and then gaining their commitment to do what is needed when needed.
5.	Gaining commitment to continuous improvement.

Our surveys in Auckland and Sydney across all industries have an average 'human performance' rating of 65%. This result is frequently supported by comment that this is about the level expected and acceptable. If you think in terms of a low result, then you are inclined to get a low result!

Consider the five factors; there is no reason why items 1-4 cannot be achieved 100%. Perhaps rating continuous improvement is more difficult, but if the team is willing to consider and adopt higher standards when current standards are being achieved, then continuous improvement could also be rated 100%: Given this background 65% is 65%, and reflects major opportunity to improve human performance in most if not all businesses.

Target areas 1-3 we call "management", and much of it involves straight forward administration, policy and procedures.

Target areas 4 and 5 are interactive leadership, the artfulness and skill of getting the team behind you, gaining their agreement to do the things required as required.

Putting the essential business practice together with the artfulness of building team spirit and drive and commitment is what we call 'complete management'.

This leaves open the question of why perceived performance is so low at only 65%.

Other factors in the OPD leadership readiness audit provide the insight into the real underlying issues with average results as below.

1.	The clarity of the models and linkages whereby actual behaviour on the job is linked to business goals and strategy.	69%
2.	The clarity of the human resource management process and systems intended to achieve high levels of human performance.	69%
3.	Belief that the models, linkages and processes will in fact achieve increased human performance.	74%
4.	Belief in return for effort that is extra leadership effort will get improved results.	83%
5.	Intensity of leadership effort.	78%

The links between actual behaviour and strategy are not clear (1), nor are the human resource management processes intended to achieve high human performance (2). The failure of these human resource technical links erodes belief that the processes will work (3), and despite managers knowing that better processes will result in improved performance (4 at 83%), the overall intensity with which better performance is pursued is a modest 78% (5).

The crucial resource in any business is how the executive think. The executive paradigm being that blend of attitudes, models and concepts whereby the executive 'see' the business and then use what they see it to choose a course of action.

Global management theory frequently offers models and processes detached from social science and serious issues of causality, methodology and theory construction. Yet to build on anything other that what is deeply recognized and understood in social science is to build on sand, hence little wonder current models of management and leadership become another flavor of the month.

The issue is exactly that the current global management and HR models, processes and linkages between strategy and actual performance are neither clear nor certain, and managers know this. Commitment to those processes is less than total and as a result overall human performance is less than it could be.

Leadership is the process of identifying what people need to do to succeed then gaining their commitment to do it every day at work. Leadership demands good models linking actual behaviour to the strategy, good administration that structures and manages the business processes and provides effective monitoring and feedback, and finally good interpersonal skills whereby people feel supported, coached and important in a team environment valuing them and valuing their contribution to the team performance.

After decades of research there are now available linkages and models that precisely and accurately link actual performance on the job with the strategy. In the OPD SHRM solution we identify unequivocal links between business strategy and actual behaviour that provides the platform for leaders to enhance daily performance creating self-sustaining continuous improvement where the business gains ongoing momentum through engaged, committed and satisfied staff. Success building on success based on an executive paradigm grounded in social science concepts providing the complete model and foundation for effective leadership action.