The he P Performanc rmanceStat A Approac ach h to Performanc - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The he P Performanc rmanceStat A Approac ach h to Performanc rmance M Manage anageme ment (And d Ada daptin ing it it t to t the L LFP FP Context)

August 2020

Andrew Feldman, Director, Grant Thornton Public Sector

1

What i is s Per erforman manceS eStat?

2

• Ongoing, regular meetings between leadership and

agencies

• Can be organized by agency or by priority areas that

span agencies. (Or both.)

• Participants review key trends in performance

metrics, diagnose problems, and decide how to fix them.

• Broader process includes prep for meetings, the

meetings themselves, and follow-up actions.

Exampl ample: e: Gover ernor led ed

3

StateStat in Maryland (By agency and priority)

Exampl ample: e: Mayor led ed

4

LouisStat in Louisville, KY (By agency and priority)

Exampl ample: e: Agen ency-head ead l led ed

5

CStat at the Colorado Dept. of Human Services (By division)

Approa

• ach

ch t to c

• con
• nside

ider: Leg egisl slative-commi mmittee ee led ed

6

The d e differ eren ence b e bet etween een P Per erforman manceS eStat an and mor

• re tr

traditio ditional ch check ck-in meet meetings

7

• All leaders do check-in meetings with senior

managers around updates / hot topics.

• PerformanceStat is different:

 Data-driven.  Sustained focus on same set of metrics / challenges until fixed.  More people in room to expedite decisions.

Some me key ey req equiremen ements s for P Per erforman manceS eStat

8

• Most important: lead

adershi ship e engage ngageme ment.  Otherwise PerformanceStat turns into “MimicStat”—show-and-tell without tackling tough issues.

• Follo
• llow-up

up: Every meeting starts with do-outs from previous meeting.

Desi esign c choices es with P Per erforman manceS eStat

9

• Stru

tructu ture: Focus on agencies, priority topics, both?

• Meet

eeting f freq equen ency: Having enough frequency to create pressure for action.

• Forma

rmat, including “no surprises” approach vs. requiring participants be ready for any question.

La Laun unching ng PerformanceStat t to LFP LFP

10

• Oppo

Opportun unit ity: Sending a clear message to agencies that LFP cares about results and about data-driven improvements.

• Chal

hallenge nge: : Less direct control of agency operations and likely less frequent meetings than traditional PerformanceStat

• Getting st

ng star arted: : The process can start with a limited set of metrics / focus areas and grow. Follow-up on will be key to show it’s real.

A fi final l tho houg ught

11

The “iron triangle” of performance management – i.e., min. requirements for an agency to see performance measures as useful tool, not a compliance exercise.

The executive (Governor) cares about metrics and improving results The agency head cares about metrics and improving results The legislature cares about metrics and improving results

A fi final l tho houg ught

12

The “iron triangle” of performance management – i.e., min. requirements for an agency to see performance measures as useful tool, not a compliance exercise.

The executive (Governor) cares about metrics and improving results The agency head cares about metrics and improving results The legislature cares about metrics and improving results

Perform

• rmanc

nceSta tat c t can demons

• nstra

trate t this

Keep Keep i in touch!

13

And ndy F Feldman man Director, Grant Thornton andrew.Feldman@us.gt.com Gov Innovator podcast (govinnovator.com) @AndyFeldman