Typically eloquent piece by Simon Caulkin in yesterday's Observer: The devil is in the details:
How would you appraise a vicar's performance? By the number, length and quality of sermons? Attendance at church? Out of wedlock births? Ratio of marriages to divorce? Doctrinal purity?Caulkin does a great job articulating the paradox of performance measurement. If you are in too much rush to read the whole thing, here's his key point:
This intriguing question was raised by proposals put forward last week by the Church of England's General Synod to make incompetent vicars easier to sack, and to subject them to the kind of performance measures that apply to other workers.Don't laugh:... In one study, a Norwegian hospital chaplain had performance measures that counted not only bedside visits, but also the number of last rites he performed. In fact, the church's measurement problem illustrates with blinding clarity the tensions inherent in all performance management.
If performance management is both inevitable and impossible, what's to be done? The answer is to disconnect measurement from control - to reconceptualise it, as professor Andy Neely of the Advanced Institute for Management Research has put it, as a system of learning rather than control.Yes... mind you, that's how schoolteachers tried to "sell" me on exams; they had a hard time convincing me of their sincerity!
Bookmark: del.icio.us Digg it ma.gnolia Yahoo MyWeb Google StumbleUpon
Permalink











Facebook/Johnnie Moore
Linkedin/Johnnie Moore
Twitter/johnniemoore
Last.fm/johnniemoore
Del.icio.us/johnniemoore
Technorati/johnniemoore
MyBlogLog/JohnnieM
Blog/Johnnie Moore