Outcomes-Based Leadership: Not Common Sense

We've often written here on PMThink about the need to focus on outcomes. It occured to me that a lot of people look at Outcomes-Based Leadership as a "given." They say, "Of course leadership should be based on outcomes! What else would it be based on?"

It is surprising then how little focus is really given to outcomes in organizations. They focus on activities, tools, processes, forms, measures, costs, schedules, and so on. Everything except outcomes.

If we really revisited many of the processes and tools in our organizations with a keen eye toward outcomes (i.e. what purpose is it intended to serve, and is that the best and fastest way of serving it), we'd see how far we miss the boat.

I have a model I like to use called SET. It stands for Simplicity, Engagement, and Technology. It's simple, but powerful, and works well with outcomes-based leadership.

When we look at outcomes, we must keep these three factors in mind : Are we taking the simplest effective route (and do we even understand and agree on what the outcomes should be in the first place)? Are we engaging others in the best way to achieve our outcomes? Are we leveraging technology effectively or is it getting in our way?

Most organizations have a Chief Technology Officer. To this, they should add a Chief Simplicity Officer and a Chief Engagement Officer. If all three were focused on outcomes, and geared all people, budgets, departmental structures, processes, and tools toward the outcomes the organization is striving to achieve, strange things would begin to happen. People would become energized, not weighed down by the saddle of overused, misused, and rigid processes. It would become second nature for people to ask, "And just why are we doing this?"

Meanwhile, I'm afraid Outcomes-Based Leadership is not common sense. But I have hopes that one day it will be.