|
Beyond Analysis
 Recently I was in an operations review meeting with a group of analysts, managers, and executives. To my surprise, a high school flashback pushed its way into my consciousness as the meeting unfolded.
My high school English instructor was an old-school teacher. For weeks, he would drill us on arcane language constructs—noun-verb agreement, sentence diagrams, and the horrors of dangling participles. He was a stickler for active verbs as opposed to passive tense—so much so that each week a class member was made to stand in the front of the room and compose active and passive sentences, using subjects and verbs provided by our teacher. If the classmate stumbled, students were encouraged to shout out the error. The good teacher was certainly not a "participation trophy" kind of fellow, but by the end of the semester, everyone had English language fundamentals down pat. More importantly, we learned the underlying lesson he wanted to convey: passive has its place, but it is routine, often unremarkable, and not meant to inspire or compel a response. By comparison, active voice is vividly descriptive, commands attention, and is motivational. It's even risky in some contexts.
Then I flashed forward to my present-day meeting. As I listened to the presentations and updates given by the analysts and managers; and, as I watched the reactions of the executives, it was clear that the executives weren't getting what they needed. Yet the executives were not "shouting out" that they expected (and needed) better quality information presented in an active manner. They expected information for action, but they were getting a simple narration of findings. Likewise, the presenters were seemingly unaware that by stepping up and providing actionable information and recommendations, they could strengthen their influence on the organization and open the door for career-development opportunities.
Employees at all levels recognize the value of operational dashboards, financial summaries, and customer survey results—all forms of analytics. But in an economy showing only painstakingly slow improvement, executives and leaders are looking more than ever for recommendations and solutions that will achieve operational goals and drive their companies toward profitable growth. That need creates an opportunity for managers and employees. Those tasked with operations, market, financial, service, and actuarial analysis have an opportunity to broaden their accountabilities and expand their level of influence on their company's strategy and business performance. These individuals can transform the perspective of analytics from primarily retrospective to more prospective and prescriptive based on their hands-on understanding of the customer, marketplace, operational realities, and historical business performance. It's moving from passive to active—continuing to provide operational performance results but elevating one's game by offering sound, fact-based, meaningful recommendations to address a company's challenges.
Developing increasing levels of influence with company executives demands trust built upon credibility. One way to create that relationship is to begin with tactical recommendations, comparatively small in scope, that are directly associated with company goals and that have quantifiable outcomes. The following hierarchy of objectives, modeled for a health plan but readily adaptable to many organizations, is one tool to help target recommendations.
Apply this diagram by starting with preliminary analysis that may already exist or that you can prepare at a high level. This analysis provides directional guidance: where are improvement opportunities that dovetail with company goals? Then select an operational function (e.g., Provider Relations), a deliverable category (e.g., Capabilities), and then one or more tactical deliverables that your analysis suggests are candidates for improvement. Develop alternatives that are aligned with the company strategy and that will measurably improve performance. Then force-rank the alternatives in order of potential impact. Here is a conceptual illustration:
And now the challenge/risk: recommendations must pass the litmus test of sound decision-making and credibility, based on fact-based analysis. In other words, does it make sense to experienced decision makers, and does it stand up to scrutiny? Will potential detractors be persuaded by irrefutable facts? Starting small and targeting clear improvement opportunities helps limit risk, and it improves the chances for getting the go-ahead. If you've done your homework and see it through, you'll have a successful outcome and, in turn, you'll earn enhanced credibility with your peers and superiors. It's this precious organizational capital that is the critical ingredient for increasing influence within a company. This credibility opens the door for targeting higher levels on the hierarchy of objectives and multiplying—sometimes geometrically—the positive impact of recommendations.
In recent memory, there hasn't been a more perilous time for many businesses, but there also has never been a better time for motivated, creative individuals to help their company improve performance and position for market leadership. Rewards come to those willing to take thoughtful risk. The upside for the analytic function, analysts, and those who lead them is immense. But it requires, in the vernacular of high school, the fortitude to stand in front of the class and compose solid, compelling recommendations in the active tense.
|
|
