Here's another installment in my long series on this topic. For those of you who haven't been following this thread, here's a quick recap. In my first post on this topic, I explained my basic premise that there are major differences between Strategy Execution software and the broader category of Performance Management software and why I believe that only Strategy Execution software really helps an organization become more performance-focused. I've since talked about accountability (Part 2), driving action (Part 3), performance improvement (Part 4), communication (part 5), data (part 6), and I last talked about who should actually run this software in your organization (part 7).
For a system to become pervasive means it needs to be in every nook and cranny of an enterprise with tens or hundreds of thousands of users. Today, only email is universally pervasive. For a Strategy Execution system to become pervasive it needs to be managed and administered by those who use it. No central authority, IT or otherwise, can manage the constant and immense change such a system demands.
The need for distributed management is difficult for people to come to grips with. One helpful analogy might be a centralized project management system. Hundreds of project managers in a large company maintain thousands of projects. If IT had to make changes to each of those project plans and update tasks, it would be a nightmare. Nothing would get done and/or it would be hugely expensive. My view is that Strategy Execution software is in this same category that MUST be administered by users.
Here is a list of software capabilities you should look for to enable distributed non-technical administration of the system:
- Availability as a hosted system or software as a service (alternatively, you could outsource just the “technical” server-level support to your IT department)
- Easy manual data entry with notification and grouped entry. If I have to enter data for three measures each month, make it easy on me. Send me an email telling me it's due, with a link to the screen where I enter it. Group all of my data entries on one page so I can do it quickly.
- Easy spreadsheet upload. OK, I’m the department business analyst. I’ve got most of this data already. Make it easy for me to get my data into a spreadsheet format and load one or a few spreadsheets a month to load all of my department’s metrics.
- Enterprise-level integration. You will want to automate some data feeds. If you have a rich data warehouse, you should take advantage of it. The product you choose should also have a robust enterprise-level extract and load tool for mapping external data to measures in the system. At the least it needs to support data bases (SQL) and files. Support for newer “service oriented architecture” calls are a big plus.
- Wherever that data comes from (upload at the department level, integration with other systems, someone else manually entered it) the owner should have a chance to review and approve it before it is published into the system.
- Easy-to-create and edit measures. If you're someone who has the skills to add two columns on a spreadsheet, you should also be able to create a measure in a Strategy Execution system.
- Easy-to-create scorecards, objectives, goals, initiatives, etc. Similarly, non-IT users need to be able to create and edit all of these objects without a ton of training.
- Strong security, but with overrides. Users should be able to “invite” others to at least see their content without going back to ask someone else to make it possible.
- The ability to copy or clone objects. Need a copy of that scorecard for the other four regions that weren’t interested last month? Users should be able to copy from existing objects without IT support.
- Easy-to-create reporting metaphors. Users should be able to quickly create dashboards, briefing books (to support business reviews), and other use-case based displays. A general purpose reporting engine screams for IT involvement.
- Each group of users should be able to administer their own “sandbox” without affecting others. They shouldn’t even see the content of other groups (unless they have been granted permission). A top-level administrator should control the rights of a distributed group administrator. Again, it needs to be easy enough for a savvy business user to manage.
- Even with all of the above, the training required can’t tear users away from their "real jobs" for too long. An hour or two for a simple user. Half a day for a power user. Maybe a day for an administrator.
It is important to point out that even if users administer their system, someone still has to manage the servers, databases, network, and other underlying technology of the system. This can be an internal IT function, or you can find a vendor offering a SaaS (Software as a Service) option.
I hope these ideas help you think about your own organization and how you'd like to use a Strategy Execution software package to automate Balanced Scorecards, dashboards, performance improvement, and more. I'd love to hear your feedback from previous experience or questions about how this works that I didn't address.
Next, I'll turn my attention to some more advanced features that organizations find themselves needing as they conquer more detailed aspects of Strategy Execution.
Comments