Hellmut Ometzberger

Effective performance evaluation and feedback is a continuous ongoing process. It is not just an annual or quarterly check-in. It comprises of feedback and feedforward. It is bidirectional and it is constructively critical. Performance discussions take the form of situational, daily standups, PDCA cycles, retrospectives, 1x1, and the often-dreaded performance meetings. Performance issues - especially initiations of improvement plans - should never be a surprise. It is also important to understand that to sustainably improve performance, you have to know when to be someone's coach, cheerleader, and/or champion. Being the critic will not improve performance. Managers always must be introspective first when assessing a performance issue.

Before advocating for your team's needs, clearly understand the business needs for IT services and deliverables. Once you have alignment with the business on the business value that IT services and projects deliver, then you can begin to frame the investment needs that support these goals and overarching outcomes. Fundamentally, you need to run the Sales and Operations Planning process for IT. This is the same process business leaders use to run the business operations. It helps both parties to prioritize and optimally deploy limited resources. Most importantly, develop value and outcome-based relationships and arguments. Framing IT in terms of cost only does not set up anyone for success or optimize business and IT performance.

Simply put, you don't. A performance evaluation is not the right vehicle to identify expertise. Expertise is identified and developed through daily interactions and 1x1 check-ins. The more formal performance evaluations should be checkpoints for both manager and team member to ensure that we are on track with respect to mutually agreed on personal and professional development. Is training completed on time and is material absorbed and effectively used? Is performance on project and other work tasks meeting objectives? Is continuous improvement and quality commitment clearly visible in thinking, deciding, and execution behaviors? Daily coaching opportunities are the true window into sustainable high-performance at individual and team levels.

A common fallacy is to start by setting goals, SLAs and OLAs. Quality is, first and foremost, anchored in organizational culture and the operating model. You start by defining the business requirements that define operating model and operating parameters. Next, you define the desired behaviors and (standard) operating processes to prevent waste and variance. The trick here is to leverage the power of rituals and habits. Quality, after all, is delivering what the customer requested - not more, not less - at the right time, the right way, the right cost, and every time, especially when no one is watching. Goals, including SLAs and OLAs, can now become part of the information and controls flow that drive continuous improvement.

Strategy is not a "once-a-year" effort. Strategy and strategy execution require a systemic approach that cascades information, feedback, decisions and controls through the organization. The more effective strategy execution loops become, the more adaptive, outcome oriented, and self-sustaining strategy becomes. In fact, it is often helpful to first drive organization wide agreement on how strategy will be cascaded and executed before strategy is set. This approach ensures optimal alignment on objectives, execution towards goals, responding to change in the environment, and resolving bottlenecks. Consider leveraging Hoshin Kanri for strategy execution, and OODA (observe, orient, decide, act) as you shape your organization's approach.

When prioritizing work, focus on maximizing the value tasks create. Ideally, the flow of work is driven by customer demand, and there is sufficient capacity to complete this work within the timelines agreed upon with the customer. The key to success is to pivot from an "economy-of-scales" driven thinking that overloads the system to a throughput optimized thinking that maximizes outcomes and value creation. First identify the task on the critical path for each project/work type and the portfolio. Then identify the constraints and resolve them until you reach the desired throughput. No more "hair on fire" firefighting. No more unnecessary task fragmentation, variation and quality escapes.