That's also the paradox of effectiveness vs efficiency. I suspect it comes to any company moving from entrepreneurial leadership to a more conventional model.
Accountant and consultant types love efficiency. it's easier to measure, predictable, and cost-cutting works. Do what you are doing but strip out any spare capacity.
But better, IMO, is effectiveness. That's doing the thing which works best, but for the longer term, in ways which can't necessarily be easily measured... customer satisfaction? Quality product? It's much easier to be effective in a more ad-hoc environment, where you don't necessarily do exactly the same thing every time, and where you've got spare capacity if needed. It isn't necessarily so efficient, as such, but it may lead to better ways of working and a better end-product.
The paradox is, attempts to measure these via accounting-style proxies worsen effectiveness: and targeting these measures decreases efficiency, as you add unnecessary procedures trying to hit these nominal targets rather than doing what really needs doing...
Best of all is a balance. Not IMO often seen in any company large enough to have separate departments/functions for Change, Quality, Process or similar signifiers of too much management. ;-) |
