Bertrand Duperrin's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
"I've always been a big believer in using results as the differentiator between success and failure. You either achieve your goals or you don't. Energy, creativity, and activity are all good things — but they don't create value unless results are achieved.
Most organizations take the same stance. They put a great deal of emphasis on reporting and celebrating quarterly and yearly results — with the assumption that there is a huge upside to being perceived as a winning company. After all, positive results attract investors, raise stock prices, reinforce customers, draw talent, and more.
But only athletic events produce clear winners and losers in the short-term — and most organizations are not actively engaged in those. In fact, in many cases, the immediate "results" are in reality unknown, ambiguous, or disconnected from current performance."
-
This is not to say that we should abandon any of these ways of viewing organizational performance. Rather, we need to better understand how these numbers were achieved and what they are actually saying about a company's long-term health. In other words, metrics are starting points for dialogue rather than conclusio
-
As individual managers we do not have the luxury of personal analysts, so we have to interpret the true meaning of results ourselves. But all too many managers avoid or ignore this part of their job — either because it takes too much time, is too difficult, or will lead to uncomfortable discussions. So instead they treat scorecards like scoreboards, with black and white numbers that they think tell the whole story.
- 2 more annotation(s)...
IT projects need define a combine the engineering work to be done and the results that they create. Doing so requires more than giving the project a business based name. Here are a few steps for an alternative way to define an IT project.
Combining these three ideas, when companies pay to execute a project, it’s not the project they want, it’s the result. They want more revenue generating customer relationships, not processes around a CRM system or even the capability to look up customer names. What they want is the result.
-
First, companies don’t pay for activities, they pay for results. As explains in the blog post http://blogs.gartner.com/mark_mcdonald/2009/06/30/activities-vs-results—the-difference-makes-all-the-difference/From this post.
Second, those results come from changing capabilities which are a more powerful definition of the business. So it’s the capability people want. http://blogs.gartner.com/mark_mcdonald/2009/07/02/capability-is-more-powerful-than-process/
-
Results can be defined in the following ways:
But a new type of workplace is emerging, one that is more results oriented and focuses on what you accomplish rather than how many hours you log in.
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in results
-
US Presidential Election 2008
The US Election 2008 Web Mon...
Items: 1 | Visits: 50
Created by: ecoresearch
-
New Search Engine
TripleMe.COM fetching yo...
Items: 2 | Visits: 40
Created by: sorand
-
Penisenlargement
Vigrx :Try Herbal Enlargemen...
Items: 2 | Visits: 92
Created by: john whitemhn
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo
