Monitoring & Troubleshooting Work

Monitoring & Trouble shooting work are 2 parts of 4 in the Core Portion of my Management Areas of Performance Model/Framework.

That model was the subject of this book – written in 2004 but published in 2007… Management Areas of Performance

That book was updated in 2011 – see the next graphic: Developing Your Management Areas of Performance Competence.

The next graphic also shows another component of the Model/Framework … the individual Processes (WorkFlows & ThoughtFlows) – owned by a manger and department – or support by the people of a manager and department.

You know, the Processes where the people work.

One of the big issues for those of us in ID/ ISD/ LXD haven’t changed much over the years.

It’s that the vast majority of Processes (WorkFlows) are Un-Named, Un-Measured, and Un-Managed.

Therefore most Managers cannot give Feedback worth a damn.

They can offer encouraging and reinforcing feedback when things seem to be going well enough – even when they don’t have a clue as to why.

But they cannot offer discouraging or corrective feedback to nudge or bump or push people to do the work differently – and explain why.

In the Spirit of: “Doctor Heal Thyself”

Back in 2001 I published the following book – T&D Systems View. This next graphic explains the 12 sub-systems of the model on the cover of that book.

My intent was to frame 47 Processes – that I believe exist within (almost) every T&D/L&D/LXD/KMS system – into 12-Subsystems and provide a Diagnostic Tool and a Design Tool (a two-fer) for identifying where Problems/Opportunities exist for T&D/L&D/LXD/KMS leadership to address.

Not that they need to get each of the 47 to a SixSigma level of Process Perfection.

But to address the most pressing problems/opportunities via Continuous Improvement or Discontinuous Improvement.

Why Don’t Managers Understand Their Own Processes?

I speculate that it is generally because they “grew up/climbed the ranks” in the function – coming up through one series of jobs and didn’t work in all of the jobs in their organization. They know some of the specifics of their departments or function or enterprise – for the jobs that they themselves had – but not enough of the other jobs that they didn’t have.

They didn’t rotate though all of the jobs, departments and function – as some leadership development efforts have HIGHPOs do.

Not that I think that every manager needs to have had every job in their unit.

They simply have to have more than a surface understanding about the WorkFlow (Process) of their unit and what people are supposed to do task-wise for produce Worthy Outputs for downstraem use – and what all of the Stakeholder require of both tasks and Outputs.

Then they will be ready to “manage” their unit, its Processes (WorkFlows) and People.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.