Performance measures can boots IT efficiencies, generate buy-in from stakeholders, and improve technology's impact on teaching and learning. But you have to do it right.
A hot air balloonist calls down to a man he sees on the ground. “Do you
know where I am?” The man replies: “41° 28’ north latitude, 81° 37’ west
longitude, and about 150 feet off the ground.” The balloonist calls:“Thanks.
You must work in IT.” “Yes I do—how did you know?” “Because you
answered my question, and I still don’t know where I am.” The man on the
ground calls back: “You must be a superintendent.” “Yes I am—how did you know?”
“Because when you got here you were lost, and you’re still lost, but now it’s my fault.”
As a district technology leader, you’re
the key player in helping your superintendent
and other senior leaders measure
performance and provide accountability
across all district functions. But if you
don’t understand what exactly needs to
be measured and why, or how to communicate
this information to your non-IT
colleagues in a language they understand,
the best technology in the world won’t
help improve your organization. What
follows is a brief primer on how school
CIOs and their staffs can begin to build,
report, and act on performance measures.
STEP 1: UNDERSTAND THE METRIC SYSTEM
What do we mean by performance measures?
In a nutshell, critical information
that, once organized and shared, will
spur action and provide accountability.
There are three categories of measures:
Input Measures = what you have to work
with. Example: the number of networked
computers in a school, their age, RAM,
and/or processor speed.
Output Measures = what’s been done
with inputs. Example: improved graduation
rates and test scores. Output
measures in one context (end-of-year test
scores) can be input measures in another
(baseline data for the next school year).
Work Measures = how inputs become
outputs. The most important work measures
are “lead indicators”—data you can
gather and report today that tells you
something important about how your
output measures will look in the weeks,
months, and years to come. Example:
student attendance describes current
work—how much of the available time
teachers and students actually work
together—and also helps schools predict
output measures such as grades, promotion,
and test scores.
Measures best drive performance
improvement and provide accountability
when there’s a clear and shared understanding
of cause and effect. For example,
driving increased student use of computers
will be easier if everyone involved believes
that the action will improve student test
scores or grades. Direct cause-and-effect
relationships between measures are rare,
however, so IT-related output measures
need to be linked to school or district
outputs through a “theory of action.”
For instance, if you believe that student
test results improve when they spend
more time with particular software, than
computer up-time is an output measure for
IT activity that helps create a condition
(software use) that enables the goal of
higher test scores.
STEP 2: DEFINE YOUR GOALS
Now that you have some working definitions,
come up with a set of four to
eight IT output goals. Your goals should
focus on technology architecture and its
impact on the district’s ongoing operations
and stem from district plans. No matter
what goals you decide on, they should
address efficiency and effectiveness.
Efficiency goals might include:
- Reducing the annual overhead of noninstructional
areas such as operation
and maintenance of schools, transportation,
food services, and central
office administration.
- Realizing a positive return on investment
for new technology projects.
- Reducing total cost of ownership of
end-user equipment, especially PCs
and peripherals.
Effectiveness goals for IT are harder
to define because they should be tied to
overall district goals. Some possible IT
effectiveness areas that can be tied to
district goals include:
- Customer satisfaction and service quality
- Technology availability and response time
- Technology usage rates
STEP 3: DEVELOP THEORIES OF ACTION
Generate a customized theory of action
for each of your goals (see Step 1 for a
definition). It’s important to regularly
back up these theories of action with
external research and internal results so
they are credible to stakeholders.
STEP 4: DESIGN MEASURES
Next, define and develop measures for
tracking your goals. If one of your efficiency
objectives is to reduce IT overhead,
for example, you might design
measures for tracking how much enduser
technology actually costs over its
entire life cycle (total cost of ownership),
including purchase and installation,
training and support, repairs and upgrades,
and removal and disposal. A quarterly or
monthly update of projected annualized
TCO per PC will be affected by new PC
purchases, renegotiation of maintenance
contracts, changes in the software environment,
and other factors. If another
one of your goals is to improve technology
usage rates, you might design measures
for tracking how often PCs are used and for what purpose. IT systems generate
almost any data you could want, and the
processing of that data into measures can
be automated, so be persistent in finding
the data sources you want and setting up
the measurement reporting.
STEP 5: REPORT TO STAKEHOLDERS
Finally, decide on four to eight key
measures you want to regularly report to
your district or school. (You can make
other measures available on the school
intranet or include them in an annual
report.) Focus on output measures and
key leading indicators and provide
supporting narrative with your report,
including any relevant goals or benchmarks
or changes in input measures (like
staff reductions) that provide useful
context. Remember: any measure you
report must be tied to a clear, defensible
theory of action. If nobody will help you
articulate those theories, you need to do
it anyway and keep repeating them until
others challenge or accept them.
Work measures are important too—
they should focus the daily work of IT
and there should be internal theories of
action about how they relate to inputs
and outputs. For example, IT might internally
report and use such work measures
as help desk call abandon rate (percentage
of callers who give up before their
call is answered), percentage of problems
resolved during a help desk call, and
average time to fix problems that could
not be fixed during the call. Such measures
will be numerous and will be more
helpful if organized conceptually. Two
frameworks for doing that are:
- Use: IT in schools is either for management
(used to help run the school or
district as a whole, like a student
information system), teaching (used
by teachers to support their work, like
an electronic grade book), or learning
(used by students in the learning
process, like a biology dissection
simulation).
- Architecture: IT capacity can be classified
as infrastructure (Internet access,
wide-area and local-area networks,
servers, routers, and wiring); applications
(finance, human resources, student
information systems); data (operational
data stores and data warehouses
or stored data sets); portal (Web presence,
content management, and software
and systems interface issues);
and end-user devices (PCs, printers,
handhelds, and other devices).
Regardless of how IT work measures
are organized, the appetite of non-IT
people for them is limited, so reporting
should focus on key IT outputs, their
relationship to district goals, and any
noteworthy trends in inputs or leading
indicators. Be sure to revisit these measures,
because the ones that matter may
change over time, and new data sources
are always coming to light.
Of course, no amount of measurement
reporting can overcome harsh budget
realities. Performance measures have not
translated into more technology funding
in my district, where a revenue crisis
drove IT spending and staffing down more
than 50 percent over a three-year period.
Nevertheless, measures are useful
during such crises, as they help prioritize
use of limited resources and guide daily
management and continuous improvement
efforts to squeeze maximum efficiency
and effectiveness out of every dollar and
every minute. And the discipline of making
and using measures holds the hope that
future investment of resources in K–12
IT will be better focused on improving
efficiency and effectiveness. Our children
deserve no less.
Peter Robertson is the chief information officer
for the Cleveland Municipal School District.
He’s on leave for the 2004-2005 school year
to complete his doctorate in educational
leadership at Columbia University.
A Trial-by-Error Example
Here’s how one district tweaked performance measures to better
match their objectives.
BEFORE:
Pre-2003, Cleveland’s IT department
had no formal role in PC procurement.
Years of uncoordinated PC buying in
reaction to grant funds had created a
huge unfunded “total cost of ownership”
liability. Efforts to reduce that
liability generated mountains of data
about help desk, field support, and
server and bandwidth usage. Because
such measures were relatively easy to
create, IT reporting consisted of long
reports of field support ticket statistics
sorted by category. Summaries of that
reporting showed a roughly 40 percent
decline in average problem resolution
time even while ticket volume doubled.
Such reporting was used to explain
that further service improvement
required additional resources, but the
explanations lacked a clear connection
to district goals. | AFTER:
PC inventory and software usage
hours were more difficult to measure
because the data had to be collected at
network servers, aggregated across the
district, and associated with the PCs
and software that triggered it. But it
was still relatively simple and, once
done, easy to maintain. The resulting
measures of input (PC inventory) and
output (software usage) were more
useful in tying IT activity to district
goals. Showing a 30 percent decline in
software usage hours per computer was
compelling to non-IT people trying
to understand technology support
problems. The same was true for the
inventory data, which revealed that 15
percent of the classroom PCs were too
old to be connected to the Internet and
about half of the district’s PCs were
out of warranty. |
|
Sample Measures
Seven measures the Cleveland
Municipal School District IT
department reports to stakeholders:
-
Tech support cost (disaggregated
by month)
- Ratio of PCs to students (classroom,
month, and PC status)
- Network up-time percentage
(device, connection, and hour)
- Help desk call volume (building,
day, and reason)
- Problem ticket resolution time
(building, day, and reason)
- Software and Internet usage hours
per PC (building, day, and software
or Web site title)
- Number of data warehouse users
and events (user, day, and report)
|
Resources
To learn more about measurement reporting, consult these sources.
-
Establishing an Integrated Performance Measurement System, the second volume
in a six-part handbook offered by The Performance-Based Management
Special Interest Group: www.orau.gov/pbm/pbmhandbook/pbmhandbook.html
- Balanced Scorecard Step-by-Step: Maximizing Performance and Maintaining
Results by Paul R. Niven (Wiley 2002)
- Results: The Key to Continuous School Improvement by Mike Schmoker
(ASCD 1999)
- The Six Sigma Way by Peter S. Pande et al, Robert P. Neuman, Roland R.
Cavanagh (McGraw-Hill, 2000): www.sixsigmaway.com
|