Write Your Own Obituary

Contemplating our limited time on earth isn’t something most of us do willingly. Yet it is the ultimate goal setting exercise. How do we want to be remembered? What do we want to achieve during our lifetime?

It’s less weird than it sounds (and I know it does sound weird). When forced to consider what we could do during our lifetimes, what we probably won’t or can’t do, we are left with the choice of what we really want to accomplish. Yet the cold reality is that unless we do something about it, our obit is going to read quite differently.

“Here lies Caroline who really meant to get around to doing a whole bunch of stuff she never had time to do …” probably isn’t how I want everyone to remember me. And of course it doesn’t just have to be achievements, but also qualities, time spent with people who are important to you, and values passed on to future generations.

Charles Dickens’ Christmas Carol is the ultimate obituary, graphically set out during Scrooge’s own lifetime. The ghost of Christmas Future showed him what would happen unless he changed his ways. It left him a different man, with a wonderfully different outlook on life.

I’ve started to write my obituary and found the exercise a good deal more difficult than I thought. Striking the balance between worthiness and being realistic isn’t easy. And I don’t want my best work to be behind me.

None of us know how long we will live, so forever putting off our biggest dreams until tomorrow probably isn’t the wisest strategy. This little exercise reminds us of exactly that.

You have to believe to achieve

Having a clear, SMART goal is a prerequisite if you want to achieve something; whether you are a business, a team or an individual. It’s hard to argue with – unless you know what you are trying to achieve, the odds of achieving it are not high. The goal in itself is not enough, though. Figuring out how to achieve it is a close second. But what about those crystal clear goals, with plans, that are still not happening? What’s going wrong?

Could it be that deep down inside, you don’t think it’s achievable? So despite revising targets year after year and promising to “try harder” and “do better” still nothing happens. Simply because at some level you don’t think you have it in you.

Henry Ford famously quipped: “Whether you think you can, or whether you think you can’t, you’re right.”

Could changing your mind change the outcome? I think so. But sometimes self-doubt goes deep, so we have to dig deep to do the changing. Figuring out that change is needed is the first step, though, because once we know what the problem is it's much easier to start finding solutions. So despite its annoying symmetry, you do have to believe to achieve.

Because all the measurement and KPIs in the world are not going to make up for self-sabotage.

An example of a powerful metric in use

Mortality ratios

Yesterday’s posting about performance metrics in the UK’s NHS system provoked much comment and discussion. The BBC’s Panorama investigated the discrepancies between certain hospitals’ own assessment of their performance, and independent assessments of their performance. In rather too many cases the discrepancies were significant.

One metric that caught my attention was discussed by Professor Brian Jarman of Imperial College, London. The hospital standardized mortality ratio compares the number of deaths expected and the number of in-patients at a hospital who actually die. Professor Jarman’s response to the interviewer’s questions was particularly instructive. When asked about the relevance of the metric he replied that it could indicate:

1. Data had been incorrectly entered
2. Something was wrong with the calculation
3. There is a problem with patient care

And he listed these possibilities in that order. In other words, the metric was an indicator that highlighted the need for further investigation. It was not an indicator that provided cut and dried proof of a problem. He went on to say that in one instance the ratio had highlighted a problem for ten years.

This is how performance metrics are designed to be used:

• An alert to a potential problem
• A need to investigate further
• Trends (upwards, downwards, consistently bad, consistently good) tell you more than any one single metric.

From my own experience I know that the NHS is not the only example of this mis-match between reported performance and actual performance. If there is any justice for tax payers this will run and run.

Learning organisation or measuring organisation?

The Sunday Times’ article yesterday about the failings of the NHS performance management system was disturbing: Labour hid ugly truth about National Health Service.

Any organisation that gives higher priority to performance measures, rather than to its core business, needs to ask some harsh questions. In this instance it will be the country asking the questions – not only of the NHS but also of the government.

Since the days of Florence Nightingale we have understood the need for basic hygiene in order to prevent infection. It seems that performance measures were able to wipe away 250 years of performance improvement by not following the most basic of health procedures.

So when results like this are achieved from a performance measurement system that we can only presume was meant well, where does the blame lie?

It would be both true and too easy to say the blame lies with the leadership. Fish rot from the head down, and those in positions of leadership must shoulder the greatest share of the responsibility. But when a trained nurse does not pay attention to basics such as washing hands, or disinfecting areas where patients are cared for, there is either a massive culture problem, or a problem with basic training. My money would be on the issues of culture, many of which have been well documented.

However, those who devised and rolled out the targets must be feeling uncomfortable now the results of their performance management exercise have been revelealed:

“Most targets and standards appear to be defined in professional, organisational and political terms, not in patients’ experience of care.”

Maybe that’s easy to say with hindsight, but for the rest of us it is a chilling reminder that performance measures must be appropriate, tested, and constantly reviewed to ensure the organisation is achieving the results it needs. And not dysfunctional results it doesn’t want.

Performance measures are a way to understand and learn what works and what doesn’t. We all make mistakes, and performance measures are not easy to get right. But what is unforgiveable is to let such a bad situation go on so long. Performance measures should be a tool for the learning organisation, not a control mechanism for the measuring organisation.

What are your core competencies?

Which competencies are essential for success in your business?

Business competencies are the things we are not only good at, but better than your competition. Being good at things, therefore, is an important part of succeeding.

Of course there are many, many things we have to be good at to succeed in business - time management, financial control, relationship management, etc. The list will be long and varied. Also, perhaps, quite interesting to see how many skills are needed for you and your team to do your jobs.

Core competencies are different, however. These are the things that you build your reputation on: the things that you want your customers to remember. The things that if you do them very well ensure your customers choose your business rather than another.

So from that long list of things you could do very well, you need to choose a few that you will do very well, and compete on those. They are your core competencies that will have your competition wondering how you manage to achieve such good service or make such good products.

Suddenly, competencies start being a powerful and important part of your business. Not just things you take for granted.

Do things differently

I’m currently on a quest to do things differently. By my ripe age I’ve got myself into some good and bad habits, and I’ve certainly established a lot of routines. Of course good habits can be a great time saver, but from time to time they need to be reviewed. What serves you well at one time may not be appropriate forever and ever.

So occasionally we all need to be given a jolt, and encouraged to try new things. It’s not easy. Habits, once formed, are difficult to break.

For example, not checking email regularly is a great time saver, but has now become a habit. Ignoring email for an hour or so hasn’t resulted in any catastrophes; not so far at least and it helps concentration enormously. It’s a “do differently” that may yield some big benefits.

I’m also attending different events, and meeting new people to challenge to my established ways of thinking.

Apart from being great fun, “do differently” has a very serious purpose. Performance improvement is all about doing things better. Better, by its very nature is different from the original. So it’s important to get used to thinking differently, challenging the status quo, and being prepared to change. Not always easy, but important.

And depending what you decide to do differently, it can also be fun.

It’s not about the numbers

I must be the last business person alive to read Jack Welch and the GE Way by Robert Slater. Not something I’m proud of, but at least I’m getting around to it now. It’s a better book than I expected.

A theme that comes up over and over again is Jack Welch’s insistence that business is not about the numbers. “Don’t focus on the numbers”, he is supposed to have said. “Numbers aren’t the vision; numbers are the product. I never talk about numbers.”

Yet it is equally clear that Jack Welch cared deeply about the numbers: cost control, market share and profitability. So what’s it all about?

Of course Welch was right – the financial numbers are the result of everything else you do. If you get the rest of business right – the right people, the right products being sold into the right markets, and the right focus on quality, the financial results will also be right. And GE’s numbers were right.

According to Slater, Welch focused on getting the right people into top positions, and on sharing good ideas between different businesses – both internally and externally. He was also a big fan of Six Sigma – the quality system with a big emphasis on measurement.

So Welch used numbers to inform him of what was going well and what needed attention. He focused on making sure things happened when and where they were needed.

Oddly enough, it’s just what the rest of us need; even though we are not running GE. Because no matter how loud we yell, or how hard we try, getting the numbers to improve without carrying out all the necessary stuff that goes before, isn’t going to cut it. We should put our focus on the things that build better products and services for customers, and the things that get them to market faster. Then the numbers will take care of themselves.