Managing for Peak Performance

If only . . . we could manage our strategic performance better and link it more imaginatively to individual performance.

The 'Holy Grail' of Performance Management

Since Management by Objectives was first introduced in the 1950s, managers have sought to establish clear links between performance measures at successive levels of their organisations. The popular "Balanced Scorecard" approach, introduced by Kaplan and Norton in the mid-1990s, has continued the quest for this 'Holy Grail' of performance management.

Linear Cause and Effect

Kaplan and Norton identify linear, cause-and-effect links between the elements of their scorecard; maintaining that organisational learning improves those internal processes which deliver value to customers, and that this in turn leads to enhanced financial performance. This cause-and-effect argument fits well with established wisdom and seems like common sense. But it is a version of common sense that still sees the business world as ordered, predictable and ultimately controllable.

Continuing Disappointments

Despite this desire to make performance management work, results from these approaches have generally been disappointing. This brief article suggests why that might be the case and offers some alternative perspectives on performance management that move away from the current over-emphasis on performance measurement at the expense of performance management