A Free Performance Thinking® Webinar
Identifying the Right Size of Accomplishments
The history of performance engineering, tracing back to Dr. Thomas F. Gilbert, anchors performance analysis and interventions to accomplishments, the valuable products of behavior. In Performance Thinking®, we coined the synonym work outputs. We have found over the decades, in which we've certified hundreds of performance consultants and coaches, that many colleagues seem to target accomplishments that do not lead us directly to behavior needed to produce them. This, we believe, is a matter of right-sizing the accomplishments that we target. Our colleague, Scott Mills, recently referred to this challenge by pointing out that, like Goldilocks in selecting the temperature of her porridge, we must find the best size of accomplishments to target, not too big and not too small. We'll explore how we find the right "Goldilocks" size of accomplishments, with questions such as:
-
What happens when we target accomplishments that are too big?
Like trying to tell someone how to build an airplane, it is frustrating when our level of analysis suggests accomplishments for which it is difficult or impossible to list and optimize the behavior for producing them. We need to chunk them down.
-
What about accomplishments that are too small?
As with instructions for filling out a tax return form, it is generally not helpful to chunk down to the size of a single letter, number, or word in a field on the form.
-
What guidelines can we use to find the right size?
As in many aspects of performance improvement, there is a certain amount of "craft" involved for experienced practitioners. In the end, we're looking for a chunk size of accomplishments that lead us clearly to needed behavior and that therefore make our analysis and design of interventions practically possible or actionable.
Carl Binder, CEO
The Performance Thinking Network