Hey Richard,

Virtually non-existent planning – that does sound very challenging!

I think I see what you mean, if the org develops an appreciation of good performance measurement to reach goals, maybe they’ll see that more hard, focused work is needed for pure strategic planning.

On the other hand, at times our team has found that steps 2 and 3…[Read more]

Hi David,

I know nothing about PLOM’s, but in general it makes sense to pick the low hanging fruit for the PuMP Pilot. Then I guess from there, build out more results maps in order of strategic importance. The “number of results maps built out” is less important than how much “benefit each results map delivers once it goes through all the…[Read more]

Hi Richard!

It sounds epic, great that something so ambitious has got buy in from executive leadership (in my case, it’s more the other way round).

Admittedly, most of our detailed planning was articulated in step 2 of PuMP (with the exception of the vision and mission).

So far it seems ok, but I’d say it’s pretty sub-optimal, I think we’d be…[Read more]

Hi Michelle,

Our measures team are currently on steps 3 & 4, your use case sounds promising – too bad about the bad timing with a management change!

Normally, results describe a state of performance, without actually implying a target of sorts. For example, contrast “suppliers deliver in full, on-time” (there is a full spectrum of a potential…[Read more]

Hi Iain,

That’s great to hear, how are things travelling along now?

So far I’m up to step 3 with my immediate team (of 3). I agree with you that in step 2, it was revealing just how little strategic goals had actually been fleshed out.

The conversations so far though seem to be getting people out of the “day to day rut” of work.

G’day Iain and Mark!