Key performance indicator: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Key performance indicator (view source)

Revision as of 20:16, 10 May 2021

2,051 bytes added ,  10 May 2021
no edit summary
No edit summary
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
No edit summary
Line 10: Line 10:


===KPIs and the [[modernist]] way===
===KPIs and the [[modernist]] way===
As a quantified abstraction of an otherwise intractable activity, one can immediately identify key performance indicators as a tool from the modernist PlayBook. “I do not understand this bizarre pantomime of subject matter expertise, so I will reduce it to it countable functions and try to understand those.”  
As a [[Second-order derivative|quantified abstraction of an intractable activity]], we can see [[key performance indicator]]s as tools from the [[modernist]] [[playbook]]. “I do not understand this bizarre pantomime by which [[subject matter expert]]s pass their time, so I will reduce it to it countable operations. I can understand those. I can count them.”  


Of course the countable, formal part of of what a subject matter expert does is is precisely the an interesting part. An expert will tell you that what she does is ineffable, difficult to describe comma and impossible to quantify. Sometimes
There is little fun in counting things that happen in ones and twos. It is much more fun to count in hundreds, thousands and millions: through that scale effect ''events'' become ''[[data]]''. Data is cool. With data, one can then plot graphs, see trends, and construct models. But this very act of scaling one loses what is special about the expert’s input: the ''expertise''. An expert will tell you that what she does is ineffable, hard to describe, and impossible to quantify. It is, in our argot, “[[informal]]”: it is insight, gut feel and experience. [[Metis]]. It is the choice of ''this'' word and not ''that''. It is the side conversation: the subtle touch that seals the deal. You can see this up close; at 30,000 feet, it disappears. ''It will not show up in your [[KPI]]s''.


Take the legal department. Because the legal function is not part of the operational framework of the firm, and it's designed to deal with the unexpected, novel scenarios and situations which have not been encountered before and in many cases will not happen again, the value that it adds is very difficult to articulate. It is not a function of things done, time spent, units produced. The value is often oblique, does not accrue immediately, or obviously comma and sometimes the entire value of a lawyers input subsists in in the lack of consequences. A well-structured response to a query may avoid 18 months of dispute and litigation. That single response is therefore more valuable than any value created in the 18-month dispute.
===[[KPI]]s as a weapon ''against'' [[modernism]]===
Let us say someone has had the bright idea of commissioning a set of [[KPI]]s to measure the legal contribution’s contribution. The legal eagles will flail. They will flounder. “But,” they will protest, too much, “we are not part of the operational stack. We don’t make widgets. We are special. We handle exceptions, crises, novelties and conundrums exactly the sorts of things that one can’t awfully well count. Things that we have not seen before and are unlikely to see again. Our value proposition is therefore hard to articulate, let alone quantify.” Seeing where the management layer are going with this, they quickly append: “''But you know it when you see it.'' Our value is not a function of the things we have done, the time we have spent or the units we have produced. Our value is oblique. It does not always accrue immediately, or obviously, or with an observable consequence. Sometimes our value is in ''avoiding'' consequences.”


It may be difficult to precisely articulate the means by which lawyers add value; by contrast it is very easy to indicate ways in which lawyers do not not. The modern office worker is beset with box taking, form filling, policy complying and carrying out needless procedural steps largely to satisfy the need to generate key performance indicators. Have as your key performance indicator the removal of these steps.
This seems self-serving, but it is true: a well-timed intervention may head off litigation. How do you value that careful meeting, against the 18 months’ of [[dispute resolution]] and [[litigation]] that was its alternative? Do you measure the value of nine months’ excellent work, however insightful or ineffable, on a deal that cratered? And how do you value the time your experts waste filling out their [[PowerPoint]]s attesting to the performance of their key indicators?


It is a meaningless, [[modernist]] bumf. It suits only [[middle management]], whom it gives something to do, someone to chase, someone to [[audit]], an attestation to gather and a [[KPI]] to stick on the dashboard slide on the monthly about to the [[opco]] deck.
But all is not lost. With a deft inversion we can set the management layer against itself. For while it may be difficult to articulate the means by we ''do'' add value, it is a total cinch to indicate ways in which we do ''not''. We are beset with boxes to tick, forms to fill, process to follow, policies to comply with and administrative tasks to carrying out solely to satisfy management’s compulsion for formal measurement. These [[key non-performance indicator]]s we can most certainly count. We can aggregate, extrapolate, model and graph them, in the certainty that every hour we spent on these formal attestations produced precisely nil value. 
We could take it a step further, and set as our [[key performance indicator]], the number of fatuous [[KPNI]]s we have identified and removed in a given period.
Well; a fellow can dream can’t he?


{{egg}}
{{draft}}
{{Outsourcing}}
{{Outsourcing}}
*[[Don’t tick boxes]]
*[[Don’t tick boxes]]
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/56619"

Navigation menu