To monitor: to maintain surveillance.
To evaluate: to assess performance.

Having set objectives and decided on the strategies by which you will achieve these objectives, you will now want to set up systems by which to:

• monitor the success of your strategies in achieving your goals
• evaluate your success in achieving your goals.

In this chapter we shall discuss ways in which systems of monitoring and evaluation can be used to:

• underpin confidence in good performance
• give warning of poor performance
• identify practice on which to build
• identify practice that should be changed.

MONITORING PROGRESS

Monitoring progress involves the effective use of systems, procedures and processes that enable you to be sure of the smooth running of the action plans designed at step four.

Such systems, procedures and processes, used properly, will give you:

• warning of the need to review and revise such plans
• the confidence of knowing when things are going well
• evidence (if you need it) to justify the changes you are making. In monitoring your progress you will be helping yourself to avoid nasty surprises and to maintain control of your attempts to achieve your goals.

EVALUATING SUCCESS

To evaluate success is to take time, after your goals have successfully been achieved, to analyse your achievement of these goals. During such ‘debriefings’ you will be reflecting on what you have done well. You will also be reflecting on the things that might have been done better.

In each case your aim is explicitly to identify the lessons you might learn to guide future behaviour. Such debriefings will allow you to build on your successes and learn from your mistakes.

INVOLVING EVERYONE

Unsurprisingly everyone should be involved in the process of monitoring performance. At the very least they will be involved in:

• monitoring their own progress towards their own goals
• getting and giving feedback on the contribution they are making to departmental, team and organisational progress.

You and your senior management team will, of course, be involved in monitoring progress and evaluating success at every level. You (and they) will be involved in:

• monitoring progress towards your personal objectives
• evaluating your successful achievement of these objectives
• monitoring progress towards organisational objectives
• evaluating the successful achievement of organisational objectives.

The successful monitoring of organisational progress and the successful evaluation of organisational objectives will, of course, involve an understanding of departmental contributions to progress and success.

This will inevitably require you to follow the progress of departments, key teams and key individuals. This may involve simply gathering ‘headline results’ from the departments, teams and individuals involved (in the form, for example, of reports). Or you may choose actively to involve yourself in the systems, procedures and processes adopted by teams, departments and individuals.

Certainly you should be involved in monitoring the progress and evaluating the success of senior management.

LINKING STEPS FOUR AND FIVE

At step four, in planning strategies for achieving goals, part of the process was deciding on:

• the criteria by which success would be judged
• the time by which the goal would be achieved
• the times by which important steps to that goal would be achieved.

The timetable agreed at step four will determine when the time has come to evaluate success. It will also suggest a useful timetable for monitoring progress.

Progress needs to be monitored in such a way that there is plenty of time to act, should action prove necessary. In some cases progress can and should continually be monitored. In other cases checks – eg meetings at which progress reports are given – need to be built into the timetable.

Success, on the other hand, can only be evaluated once the time for achieving the goal has been reached. Indeed it is often sensible to allow some time to have elapsed after the time for achieving the goal has been reached. The purpose of such evaluation is to guide future action in the light of both success and failures. Such successes and failures are not always apparent at the time of achievement. It is often only once things have settled that we are in a position to make a true evaluation.

The best way to underline the importance of step five is to consider, at step four, how and when progress will be assessed.

CHOOSING YOUR METHODS

In deciding how you are going to monitor progress and evaluate success you need to consider the success criteria you identified at step three.

If, for example, one of your aims is to reduce absenteeism by 30 per cent then you will need to find some way of measuring absenteeism and you will need to monitor its levels. This will ensure that as time moves on towards the date at which you must have achieved your objective, you are in a position to know whether levels are:

• going down
• going down at a rate consistent with achieving your objective.

Such systems might include:

• ‘clocking on’
• signing in
• taking of registers by administrative staff
• regular checking of the figure generated by such systems.

Levels could be checked at two-monthly or quarterly intervals.

If one of your sub-objectives is to discover why people are absent (physical illness, stress, family responsibilities ... ), the better to remove the causes of absenteeism, then you will need systems to gather qualitative data. These might include:

• questionnaires to be completed by absentees on their return to work
• interviews to be conducted with returners
• interviews conducted with those who are frequently absent.

Clearly you are not going to gather much useful data if the people to whom you talk are afraid that by being honest they are likely to be punished.

You might consider an ‘amnesty’ for those who admit to malingering in return for information about why they malinger and what might stop them. If you find that a significant number of employees absent themselves for reasons of stress, for example, you will need to take steps to reduce stress. If they absent themselves to deal with family responsibilities different approaches are called for. (If it is simply malingering, a quite different approach will be needed.)

Alternatively you might consider conducting a survey of all employees in which none needs give their name or department. Another method would be to conduct a survey into, for example, employees’ family responsibilities including questions about whether and under what circumstances employees feel they need to take unauthorised absence to deal with such responsibilities.

You will also need to make decisions about how to monitor progress towards a qualitative objectives such as the improvement of presentation skills.

In monitoring progress towards such goals you might:

• record ‘baseline’ data
• record similar data as the person undergoes extra training and acquires more confidence.

Such data can only come from those to whom the person in question has given a presentation. In keeping with step five you might want to arrange that all organisational presentations are evaluated by those to whom the presentation was given.

Such evaluations might comprise questionnaires, to be completed at the end of the presentation. These should include questions on:

• 1.The content of the presentation (points made, logical ordering, importance, relevance to audience).
• 2.The way the content was presented (enthusiasm, clarity, audibility).
• 3.The use of audio-visual aids (overheads, slides, microphones used well and appropriately).
• 4.The use of figures and statistics (for their own sake, to illustrate important points, to underline arguments).
• 5.Body language (arm waving, hiding behind notes, pacing).

And in each case you should try to gather quantitative data (including scales of 1-5 where 5 is excellent and 1 is poor) and qualitative data (give reasons for your answer ...).

If such data is available it should become relatively easy to detect an improvement over time (or indeed a lack of improvement). In the absence of such data detecting such improvements becomes difficult if not impossible.

Similar systems would be appropriate for most qualitative objectives.

MAKING USE OF APPRAISAL

One of the most important means of monitoring progress and evaluating success is appraisal. The setting up of an appraisal system involves the setting up of a regular cycle of meetings for everyone in the organisation (including you). These meetings involve the person to be appraised and the person (or occasionally persons) doing the appraising.

At these meetings:

• performance is reviewed
• career plans are discussed
• objectives (personal and organisational) are set
• success criteria are identified
• decisions are made about how progress might be monitored
• possible plans of action are discussed
• timetables are negotiated
• problems are anticipated and resolutions suggested.

Importantly appraisal should be seen as a means of support to the person being appraised. The idea is that in being appraised a person, with the help of another, can take stock and make plans for their own development, both career-wise and personally (if appropriate). Appraisal can provide one of the main vehicles for the six step process as it pertains to individuals. The implementation of a good appraisal system is a concrete expression of the way in which the organisation values each of its employees as individuals.

The idea of appraisal being a source of support ensures that appraisal should not be too closely linked to systems of recognition and reward. It is vital that in appraisal people take an honest look at themselves and their own progress. If they believe that the admission of weaknesses might negatively affect their remuneration or prospects of promotion they are much less likely to be honest.

If people come to see that the admission of weaknesses leads to useful advice and practical support in the attempt to eliminate these weaknesses they will be far less inclined to exaggerate their strengths.

Part of creating this trust will be building the relationship between appraiser and appraisee. If the latter comes to see

the former as a mentor rather than a judge the appraisal is likely to be useful.

The role of mentor involves helping appraisees objectively to:

• evaluate their own performance
• identify their strengths and weaknesses
• improve performance by setting appropriate objectives
• monitor their own performance
• evaluate their own success.

The word ‘objectively’ is important here. The appraisal system depends heavily on other systems, procedures and processes for monitoring progress. Appraisal can only be useful if systems such as those mentioned above are set up, taken seriously throughout the organisation and used as the basis for appraisal.

Systems for monitoring progress and evaluating success (including systems of appraisal) will be taken seriously only if:

• 1.You and other members of the management team are visibly involved (eg in being appraised, gathering the results of other forms of monitoring and interested in evaluations).
• 2.People have been properly trained in the techniques needed effectively to understand and use the monitoring systems, procedures and processes agreed.
• 3.The time and resources needed for properly implementing systems, procedures and processes (including appraisal) are ring fenced.
• 4.Timetables for appraisal should not overload management – appraisals need to be staggered throughout the year if each person is to get the attention they deserve.
• 5.Appraisers and appraisees prepare properly for appraisal by gathering the information they need, reflecting on their goals, strengths and weaknesses and on plans by which they might achieve these goals, build on these strengths and eliminate their weaknesses.

The information on which appraisal is based should not all come from ‘above’. Only a ‘360° appraisal’ can give anything like an objective picture of someone’s performance. Pupils, therefore, and support staff should be involved in the appraisal of teachers; patients, nurses and porters in the appraisal of doctors; administrative and post-room staff in the appraisal of managers. Such information can sensitively be gathered by questionnaires and in interviews.

WHISTLE-BLOWING

A system that it is particularly important to put in place is one that enables people to express their concerns about organisational bad practice.

There is rarely a disaster when we don’t hear afterwards from employees who were already concerned about the bad practice that led to the disaster. Why, you might ask, did they not express their concerns within?

Well, there are lots of reasons. Here are a few:

• fear of what others would think
• desire to be seen in a certain way
• fear of being silly (or of others believing we’re silly)
• fear of being sacked
• fear of hurting others
• loyalty to colleagues or bosses
• desire that others should like us.

Occasionally employees who feel like this ‘blow the whistle’ on their organisation. In such cases, concern about what is going on, combined with frustration with the belief they won’t be heard sympathetically within the organisation, causes employees officially to express their concerns to those outside.

All well and good if it involves a potential disaster or if the organisation’s actions are immoral or illegal, but such whistle-blowing can leave the reputation of the organisation in shreds.

If you are going through the six step process you will probably not be an organisation in which people are afraid openly to express their concerns. But it is simply not possible to eliminate all the factors that prevent people from sharing concerns with those within. It would be sensible, therefore, to put in place systems that enable people to share concerns without identifying themselves.

You as Chief Executive might make it clear to people that you are always happy to receive letters from people, anonymously if necessary. You might put suggestion boxes in corridors, lavatories and anywhere out of the way. You might invite comments for anonymous publication in the newsletter.

You might also instigate systems according to which those who share concerns are publicly rewarded. Certainly you should take steps to eliminate ‘punishments’ for such behaviour.

TROUBLESHOOTING

It is possible in setting up effective monitoring systems to anticipate some common problems. These include problems to do with:

• accountability bringing blame
• unsatisfactory documentation
• monitoring and evaluation for its own sake
• concerns about objectivity and subjectivity
• confrontation and disagreement
• distorting beliefs.

Accountability bringing blame

It is important in monitoring progress and evaluating success that the systems introduced are not seen as delivering only bad news. This is especially important in appraisal. We can learn from what we do well as well as from what we do badly. And we should work at building our strengths as well as eliminating our weaknesses.

Human beings have a tendency only to hear bad news. The person whose evaluation sheets show that 20 people thought their presentation was excellent and two thought it was awful will often remember the two more clearly than they remember the 20.

This can ensure that accountability brings with it a culture of blame. And this can undermine the sort of trust that grounds good relationships. It is extremely important that people do not think that you are monitoring their progress in order simply to identify, and blame them for, their shortcomings.

If they think this the energy you put into monitoring progress and evaluating success might be counter-productive in destroying relationships throughout the organisation.

The way to avoid this problem is to educate people. Everyone needs to know that their performance is being monitored for their benefit as much as for the benefit of the organisation. They also need to see that the system will generate good news as readily as it generates bad news: if they do something well, it will be recognised and, where appropriate, rewarded.

Unsatisfactory documentation

Sometimes the documentation used for monitoring performance is designed in such a way that the only information the system can deliver is bad.

If, for example, an evaluation sheet only has boxes for ‘satisfactory’, ‘unsatisfactory’ and ‘poor’ the person being evaluated has reason to complain. There is no possibility here of excellence being recorded: the best that can be recorded is ‘satisfactory’. People can be forgiven for feeling it simply isn’t worth putting in the effort if the most they can be recognised for is being ‘satisfactory’.

Monitoring and evaluation for its own sake

There is no point in setting up systems to monitor things in which no one is interested. Nor is there any point in monitoring a behaviour that cannot be changed. And if more is spent monitoring a system than can possibly be justified by the system being monitored, there is little purpose in the exercise. Here are the conditions under which monitoring systems are worth setting up:

• there is a clear set of success criteria (either quantitative or qualitative)
• the evidence generated by the system is potentially useful (in changing behaviour, providing evidence for success, making plans)
• there are people who want or need to know the results.

If one or more of these conditions isn’t satisfied then you will be wasting your time in setting up a system for monitoring progress.

Concerns about objectivity and subjectivity

It is important not to concentrate exclusively on quantitative measurements. The fact that something cannot be measured quantitatively does not mean it is less valuable. Such a view will lead to our valuing only what is measurable (quantitatively), not measuring what is valuable (perhaps qualitatively).

One of the reasons that people can value quantitative measures over qualitative is that quantitative measures seem more ‘objective’ in that they don’t rely on anyone’s feelings or opinions. Qualitative measurements attempt to draw conclusions from what people say about what they think or feel. Some people think this is simply unscientific.

But this is a distortion of the importance of science. (It is also a misunderstanding of science.) The idea that we might somehow get by without trying to understand others’ thoughts and feelings is a nonsense. Our ability, through what we say and do, to communicate our feelings, beliefs, emotions and sensations and to understand those communicated by others underpins all our interactions. It grounds our ability to:

• manage others
• cooperate and collaborate
• care for others
• teach and learn
• listen successfully
• inspire, enthuse and engage.

Scientists, given their need for collaboration, need to engage in such practices as much as anyone else (and far more, in fact, than the artist or philosopher who works alone in the garret).

If we want to ‘measure’ things like morale and reputation we are going to have to communicate effectively with others and try our best to understand them when they communicate with us.

Such ‘subjective’ assessment can be made more objective by gathering the views of many people. This is why questionnaires and large consultations are so important. Inter-subjectivity of this kind does not amount to objectivity, but it gets jolly close.

We can of course supplement these ‘subjective’ measures with methods that do not involve directly asking people about their feelings and attitudes towards their work and their relationships with others. As we have seen we can learn a lot about organisational morale from such things as:

• staff turnover
• sick leave
• application rates
• incidents of bullying/vandalism/abuse
• participation in voluntary organisational activities
• sales levels/exam results/waiting lists etc.

Such relatively objective yardsticks are useful indicators of morale. They do not, however, explain themselves. If you want to know why staff turnover is so high you will need to ask people about their reasons for leaving. (This was discussed during step two in Chapter 4, see especially page 83.)

There are two particularly important forms of worry under this heading that deserve to be dealt with separately.

Confrontation and disagreement

A lot of people worry about appraisal (for example) because they are worried about the possibility of disagreeing with their appraiser (or indeed with the person they are appraising). It is this sort of disagreement that tempts us to say ‘it’s all subjective’.

Such disagreements will occur and sometimes confrontations will be necessary. This is why, in discussing performance, we use indicators other than our own opinions. If we can point to hard evidence for the belief that someone needs to improve their communication skills, or for the claim that sales figures are down, then there is one less thing to argue about.

This doesn’t mean there isn’t plenty of scope left for argument and this is why it is so important that appraisers be trained in appraisal techniques and that appraisees understand the potential benefits to them of appraisal.

Distorting beliefs

One of the most important parts of appraisal training deals with the need to be aware of beliefs that can distort an evaluation. There are still people who believe, for example, that women are not as good as men at certain things. Such people are likely to interpret events consistently with this belief to the detriment of women (or men).

Other distorting beliefs include our tendency to see someone who has done something well once as unable to do anything wrong. The flip side of this is a tendency to regard someone who once did badly as likely always to do badly.

And we are all subject to the force of first impressions (a variant of the last mentioned distortion).

A good appraiser will be aware of all the possible distortions to which they are subject. He or she will be prepared to reflect on their own views, scouring them of these distortions with the aim of being fair all round.

SUMMARY

In this chapter we have discussed the importance of setting up systems by which to:

• monitor progress towards achieving the objectives set at step three
• evaluate success in achieving these goals.

Both the monitoring of progress and the evaluation of success depend on the prior identification of objectives, criteria for success in meeting these objectives, a time limit and an action plan for the achievement of these objectives. These were covered at steps two, three and four (Chapters 4, 5 and 6).

In this chapter we have seen that monitoring progress enables us to:

• be confident that objectives are being met, and/or
• get early warning of difficulties.

For this to be possible progress needs to be monitored either continuously or in such a way as to leave time for the review and revision of action plans. Monitoring progress involves setting up systems by which to gather both quantitative and qualitative information.

Evaluating the achievement of objectives, on the other hand, enables us to:

• build on success
• learn from failure.

This is possible only if we take the time to reflect on the achievement (or lack of achievement) of goals after the fact. Evaluating success requires the honest assessment of what has been done badly and what has been done well.

In evaluating success it is important to avoid a ‘blame culture’. This can be done by ensuring that as much importance is attached to what has been done well as is attached to what has been done badly.

To motivate everyone success, once identified, needs to be recognised and, where appropriate, rewarded. It is to this we turn in the next chapter during our discussion of step six.