It’s planning season for many companies right now.  What do we want to accomplish in 2011?  What will be our goals?  One of the key tools that we use to make these decisions (and communicate the logic behind them) is the organization dashboard.  The way I see it, there are two basic things you must do to have a good dashboard: 

First, pick the right metrics. 

Second, ensure people to understand the dashboard. 

In this post, I’ll explore number one; stay tuned for dashboard presentation tips in my second installment in my next blog post.  For today, let’s think about metric selection. 

Poor Metric Selection Creates Ineffective Dashboard Consumption

Why does metric selection matter?  Well, one of the more common problems associated with dashboards is “metric bloat”, often brought on by uncertainty involving metric selection.  In other words, in the absence of knowing which metrics to choose, many dashboard owners will err on the side of over-inclusion.  Not only does this lead to headaches for dashboard compilation (absent a slick system on the backend that can compile all the data), but it also lessens to the effectiveness of the dashboard.  And although in part two we’ll talk about how to get readers to understand your dashboard, it’s what you do here in part one (metric selection) that will determine if people are willing to value it enough to look at in the first place.  

So, here’s my advice: 

Point One: Have different dashboards for different audiences—Dashboards generally have two primary audiences: external to the immediate organization (i.e., senior execs) and internal to the organization (i.e., day-to-day customer contact staff).  Both need dashboards for different reasons, and therefore, actually require different sets of information – speaking to the need for separate external and internal dashboards.

• Selecting metrics for external audiences is arguably easier than selecting metrics for internal audiences.  For external dashboards, keep it to high-level achievements and challenges—and relevant to corporate-level strategic priorities.  Here are some additional tips for the external dashboard:

  

• For the internal dashboard, stakeholders likely have discrete—and very different—needs. The head of workforce management has different priorities from the human resources rep.  So internal management forums require a dashboard that will provide more context than the presentation given to senior management. Here are some tips for the internal dashboard:

Certainly the internal dashboard is at more risk of metric bloat, which brings me to my next point. 

Point Two: Question Metrics Regularly—I like the idea of an “open dashboard” policy to ensure only the most pertinent metrics remain, particularly for creating a document that serves internal stakeholder needs.  In other words, don’t become so entrenched with current metrics that you aren’t open to considering adding and removing metrics.  Any stakeholder should have the option of proposing a metric, and your leadership team can use an “experience filter” that relies on  previous experiences with metrics.  If experience indicates the metric has little actionable value, it shouldn’t pass without further due diligence.  

But if the metric warrants exploration, go ahead and add it—and give the metric appropriate time to prove itself one way or another.  And by “prove”, I mean demonstrate an ability to contribute to actionable business decisions.  Once you’ve tested a metric—say, for six months—make a final decision by taking it back to your original group of stakeholders for discussion.

What would you add to this list of recommendations?  What have you learned in working with your own dashboard metrics?  Have you tried an “open dashboard” policy? 

CCC members, reference our Dashboard Resource Center to read more about best practice companies approach their dashboards and access tools for assessing your metrics.

Related posts:

1. A Sustainable Approach to Knowledge Management
2. When Sustainable Knowledge Management Breaks Down