By Virgil Carter
What’s the best method for CEO annual performance planning
and evaluation? I suppose the answer is,
“it depends!” This is because every
non-profit organization has its own unique culture, strategic and operating
situation and personalities, which evolve and change over time. Thus, there is really no “one size fits all”
methodology. That said, there are
several major approaches for CEO annual performance planning and evaluation
that may help to put in place what will best fit and work best for every
organization and CEO.
Purpose
There is (or should be) a common purpose for performance
planning and evaluation: help the
organization to improve each year by helping the CEO to improve annually. It’s important to recognize the connection
between successful organizational performance and successful CEO
performance. One doesn’t often happen
without the other! It’s usually the
CEO, who leads the staff, and is responsible for the organization’s annual
program planning, budgeting and execution.
It’s often the CEO who helps identify the strategic directions and
priorities of the organization. Thus,
the CEO is a very valuable person for the organization’s success. Volunteer leaders should understand the
direct connection between organizational performance and CEO performance and,
thus, be committed to helping support and improve CEO performance each year in
a constructive and positive manner.
Methodologies
Each non-profit organization has its own special culture,
it’s “life-style” and value system.
Annual CEO performance planning and evaluation should fit the
organization’s culture. The following
table illustrates a range of association cultures or “life-styles” and the
characteristics of CEO planning and evaluation systems which fit each culture.
It’s worth pointing out that the “ambiguous” category is in
recognition of the situation where some associations attempt to use either a
“generic” style of performance planning and evaluation that may have been
handed down over time from within the organization, borrowed from another organization
and/or attempts to fashion a planning and evaluation process which will
represent a broad range of priorities and ideas, i.e., a smorgasbord!
Categories of Association
Culture or “Life-Style”
|
Organizational Success—Basis
for CEO Performance Planning
|
Metrics & Evaluations
|
Organizational “Fit”
|
Performance-oriented
|
CEO objectives focus primarily on organizational performance, i.e.,
strategic objectives, business operations, etc.
|
Performance-oriented measurements for strategic and/or business
operations; programs & products often seen as operational means to
strategic ends
|
Appropriate where organization puts priority of implementing strategy
& successful business operations; innovation & change may be common
|
Maintenance-oriented
|
Annual objectives focus primarily on continuity & maintenance of
status quo programs and products
|
Metrics for how well CEO maintains existing key programs &
products seen as ends in and of themselves
|
Appropriate where operational predictability and consistency have
priority; strategy is secondary; change is infrequent
|
Relationship-oriented
|
Annual objectives focus on forming & maintaining key
relationships w/other organizations & individuals according to
organization’s purpose
|
Metrics may be very difficult to identify or measure; may focus on
“soft” data, i.e., “activity summaries”,
“committee reports” & personal commentaries
|
Appropriate where external relationships are critical for
organizational purpose, i.e., umbrella, coalition, clearinghouse, cooperative
& similar
|
Critical competencies-oriented
|
Annual objectives focus on the competencies key to the success of the
overall organization and/or its specialized membership
|
Metrics may be tangible but elastic; may identify target goals,
documented activities; measurements of business operations in direct support
of competencies
|
Appropriate where organizational success is tied to critical
competencies, i.e., resource & donor development, advocacy, etc.
|
Ambiguous
|
Annual objectives may either be undefined, or a “smorgasbord that
attempts to combine objectives from various association cultures and personal
priorities across an organization
|
Metrics may often be based on generic template; taken from some other
organization; may reflect “one size fits all” perspective
|
Eventually unsatisfactory; frequently leads to a frustrating
experience; typically results from lack of focus or lack of conscious
attention
|
The table illustrates a wide range of association cultures
or “life-styles” and attempts to show how different they may be when it comes
to CEO performance planning and evaluation.
While many organizations may have elements of some (or all) of these
cultures, when it comes to CEO performance planning and evaluation it really is
important for the volunteer leaders and the CEO to reach common agreement on
what is truly most important—what matters most when it comes to organizational
performance. Remember, the purpose of
planning and evaluation: helping the
organization improve through helping the CEO to improve!
No comments:
Post a Comment