Best Practices in Lean Six Sigma Process Improvement: A Deeper Look

Chapter 7. The Case Against (Much of) Management Goal Setting

The metrics trap has a trap within the trap: the management goals that the performance metrics are beholden to. This chapter, elaborating on points made in Chapter 6, shows that dubious management goal-setting practices nourish the suspect management metrics. The reasons are that there are better ways to drive process improvement, and that backlash results from attempts to manage distant goals amid here-and-now demands of the work force.

Question to a group of managers: How many of you consider goal setting to be a basic part of your job?

All hands go up.

Next question: What would happen if you didn't set goals?

Lots of answers: Some say, "Nothing much." Someone says, "I guess they'd set their own goals."

Goals, of course, may be long-range, medium-range, and short-range. In this chapter we focus mostly on the downside of managing to medium- and short-range goals. We'll say only this about the high-level, long-range variety: They are fitting. They define the strategic direction of the firm. But, as pointed out in Chapter 6—and reiterated later in this chapter—tracking metrics monthly against strategic goals, which are by definition long-range, makes no sense.

GOAL REVERSAL

Performance management is overdue for an overhaul. Standard practice is for managers to set numeric goals, especially for output and cost. The goals are to serve as the main basis for motivating the work force, supervision, and support staff. Various incentives, ...