Register for this Webinar

• Isolate Project Effects
• Convert Data to Money
• Determine the Intangibles
• Tabulate Fully-Loaded Costs
• Calculate the ROI

Example

MYTH: The monetary value for a measure is difficult to locate or calculate.

REALITY: Most measures that matter have been converted to money.

The Kansas City SWAT team implemented the Outward Mindset program to reduce citizen complaints about the police, a mea­sure of the quality of their work. The team leader, Chip Huth, and the team knew they could avoid the complaints by being nice guys, but they still had their jobs to do. Measures of productivity were equally important, includ­ing confiscating drugs, cash, and guns; serving warrants; and making arrests. As a result of Outward Mindset, they were able to improve pro­ductivity and quality. Reducing complaints was an important quality mea­sure of success. However, according to Chip, “The Outward Mindset approach did not merely help us reduce complaints, but also helped us account for an unquantifiable reduction in lawsuits, injuries, etc., and an increase in public trust, collaboration, and drug and gun seizures.”

What else cause the complaints to decrease? The number of missions did not change, and the types of missions didn’t change. There were no policy changes and no high-profile cases in the news. In essence, the team could not think of any other factors and believed that their new Outward Mindset approach had made the difference. According to Chip, the complaints disappeared because of the behaviors from the Outward Mind­ set, “The way we responded to the reality of others while executing our work, including some changes in procedures that were born out of our commitment to seeing others, made the complaints disappear.”

When comparing the monetary benefits of reducing complaints for one year to the cost of preparing this team to use the Outward Mindset, the ROI is 5,724 percent. This is an almost unbelievable ROI, but the process and the data prove it is credible.

Story from Show the Value of What You Do, Chapter 6, Page 97

• Communicate Results
• Optimize Results
• Leverage Results

Example

MYTH: The success of one project rarely influences investing in another project.

REALITY: The best results to continue to invest in are previous successes.

Jessica Kriegel, an organization and talent development consultant at Oracle with expertise in strategic planning, talent management, and leadership development, was particularly focused on intergenera­tional understanding. More specifically, she realized that generational labels do not work. The labels aren’t bad. It’s the associations that society puts on those labels that are bad.

Although labels abound with each generational era, millennials (those born between 1980 and 2000) are the most misunderstood gen­eration. These labels keep individuals, managers, and even organizations from being as successful as they should be. Jessica’s work at Oracle pro­ vided her with an opportunity to tackle this challenge directly. One proj­ect clearly focused on this challenge, and she needed to show its value.1 A product ­development team member reached out to the person in charge of the Oracle College Hire Program about their problem with the millennials. The team member suggested that the millennials didn’t un­derstand the corporate culture, and as a result, there were behavioral and communication issues. This suggestion included a request for a training program to help the millennials acclimate to the company.

Jessica took this project on. She wanted to understand the issue and ensure that the correct program was implemented. She did not want to take on the project on the face value that millennials were the problem, and if we fix them, everything is okay.

Each year, this program develops approximately 100 to 200 new college hires, making this an important program. She examined some of the data that were surrounding the situation. A lack of productivity was reported, along with the excessive turnover of the millennials. Some were leaving soon after employment, which was very expen­sive. Consequently, the business outcomes of interest were im­ proved productivity and reduced turnover.

To understand the right solution, Jessica conducted a detailed sur­ vey with the managers and the employees. The surveys indicated that:

• New hires sometimes struggle with acclimating to the company,
• There was almost no intergenerational conflict,
• A few differences were perceived across generations, and
• Both the new college hires and the managers seemed to enjoy their work and working together.

Next, Jessica conducted focus groups to examine the problem in more detail, and the focus groups identified areas where improve­ment was needed. The managers:

• Felt that the generational cohorts were different,
• Claimed that the millennials did not understand the difference between social and professional networking, and
• Thought that millennials had low emotional

Meanwhile, the millennials felt they:

• Needed more information about why their jobs mattered,
• Wanted more communication from their manager, and
• Were struggling to find a work life

With these issues identified, the solution was designed to work with both groups to ensure that they worked productively and effi­ciently together, addressing their individual needs in two different programs (one for the managers and one for the employees). She set out to show the value of her program.

As Jessica conducted the programs, she captured reaction data. The employees felt the program was valuable, and it helped them understand more about their roles in the organization. She measured learning from both groups and found they were learning what they needed to do to be more successful. She measured application to see the extent to which they were working together because of the training. The reports were positive that they were working collabora­tively. With the increased collaboration came improvements in reten­tion and productivity. With these improvements, she took a step to sort out the effects of the program from other influences, converted these measures to money, compared program benefits to the cost of the program, and calculated that the return on investment was 695 percent. The executives were impressed, and she communi­cated the results to other groups and included a copy of her bestsell­ing book, Unfairly Labeled.

Leveraging the results of Jessica’s project has made a difference— not only for the organization in which she was working at the time, but also for the program participants and the individuals she now reaches through her writing and speaking.

Story from Show the Value of What You Do, Chapter 7, Page 117

• Data Collection
• Data Collection Methods
• Data Sources
• Minimize Bias
• Timing

Example

MYTH: Data collection to show the success of a project is almost impossible.

REALITY: With planning and effort, data collection becomes feasible and successful.

Zoe Moore has been very determined. She helps organizations de­velop their Diversity, Equity & Inclusion (DE&I) strategies by ensuring there is diverse representation in leadership and recurring profes­sional development focused on DE&I that improves workplace culture and supplier diversity programs to increase opportunities for under­ resourced businesses. She has garnished attention around the sub­ jects, but still, many leaders ask the question, “So what? What value do diversity, equity, and inclusion bring?”

Of course, supplier diversity is important, but that is just the start­ing point. Equity and inclusivity are imperative across the global business of hospitality and are where the real value of Zoe’s work re­ sides. But how can she demonstrate this value? She needs to collect data about:

• How the group reacts to diversity, equity, and inclusion (reaction),
• What they are learning about the importance of DE&I and their role in making it work (learning),
• What actions they are taking and the behaviors they are chang­ing to make this successful (application), and finally
• What impact is occurring with the team’s communication that is influencing workplace culture (impact).

This creates a new data collection stream for Zoe. While she’s worked hard to improve awareness around supplier diversity through representation metrics, the challenge is to make sure that the teams integrate DE&I successfully, and she must collect data along the same five levels of success that form the value chain, with supplier diversity being the beginning point. This situation highlights that the five levels of success, first introduced in Chapter 1, can be exam­ined at different times in projects and often from different perspec­tives. This requires data collection along the value chain to make it work.

Story from Show the Value of What You Do, Chapter 5, Page 83

• How to Achieve Success
• The Power of Objectives
• Specificity Drives Results
• Communicate, Communicate, Communicate
• Plan the Remainder of the Journey

Example

MYTH: Objectives add little value to the outcomes.

REALITY: Objectives are powerful drivers of success.

Martin Burt, Ph.D., has a lifelong quest to understand and abolish poverty. His inspirational experience in public service includes serv­ing as chief of staff for the president of Paraguay, the mayor of Asun­ción (the capital city of Paraguay), and the vice minister of commerce. Martin is the founder and CEO of Fundación Paraguaya, a nonprofit devoted to promoting social entrepreneurship and economic self­ reliance to eliminate poverty worldwide.

Martin has challenged many assumptions about poverty by asking, “What if everything we knew about poverty was wrong? What if the legions of policy makers, social scientists, economists, aid workers, charities, and NGOs marching across the globe have been using the wrong strategy and tactics to wage the wrong war against poverty?”

In his book, Who Owns Poverty?, Martin lays out the frame­ work necessary to eliminate poverty. The answer to his question, “Who owns poverty?” is clear—the people in poverty. They don’t want to be in poverty. But people in poverty are not just persons with low­ income labels. They are individuals with joy, generosity, and creativity. They have problem­ solving and entrepreneurial spirits, and they want to rise out of poverty. They just need help and support to get there, and they will get there if we give them an avenue to do so.

Martin created the Poverty Stoplight program that shows families what they must do to come out of poverty. It’s not just increasing in­ come, but it’s tackling a host of issues that altogether contribute to poverty. He developed 50 indicators of poverty, as shown in Table 9. Martin created the stoplight program with clear measures and three phases: red, yellow, and green—red (a worst ­case scenario), yellow (making progress), and green (out of poverty). Along with each indicator, for each phase, the Poverty Stoplight team developed spe­cific measures of success so that all stakeholders, including the fami­lies in poverty, can see where they are going, and the progress being made. Progress follows the five ­level framework of reaction, learning, application, impact, and ROI.

Martin needs to show the value of the Poverty Stoplight program. He needs to push its evaluation to the ROI level for governments, as they calculate benefit­-cost analysis for helping to eliminate poverty. He also needs to calculate the ROI for the companies supporting the program, showing them that this is a good investment for the company and the community. The major foundations involved in the NGOs and the charities don’t need to see ROI, but they all need to see the impact. The impact is getting families out of poverty and reaching the green light on the Poverty Stoplight. Martin needs the Show the Value Process to show the value of what they do.

Story from Show the Value of What You Do, Chapter 4, Page 61

• Find a Solution
• Performance that Needs to Change
• Learning that Supports the Change
• Preferences that Need to be Met
• Connect the Dots

Example

MYTH: The solution to a problem is almost always obvious.

REALITY: The right solution is rarely obvious.

Ginger Luttrell spent 10 years as a software engineer, including con­ figuration and programming at one of the world’s largest business software companies. The intent of new systems implementations is to improve output, quality, cost, and time. Over the years of working with these systems implementations, she noticed a problem. When an implementation project would go live, end­users, those who worked in the business functional areas or departments, would ask ques­tions such as:

• Why did we spend money on software and implementation projects yet spend little on training and support for those who use the software?
• Am I the only one who thinks the help desk isn’t helpful?
• Am I the only one who thinks that better system use will natu­ rally lead to better business results?
• How can we organize training and support without asking for a burdensome budget?
• What do I need to learn to be a better user and to better help my colleagues?

Interestingly, end-­users received comprehensive training on these systems during projects. Despite this fact, Ginger noticed that they ex­perienced problems and frustrations on the job. As a result, productiv­ity, quality, and time savings sufferer rather than improved. The types of problems Ginger was addressing were universal. Additionally, some end-­users would become so frustrated they would leave the company altogether. Ginger also saw that there was no channel for the voice of the end-users to get to the senior executives to address their issues and concerns.

Ginger began to realize a possible solution by addressing the pre­cise business needs identified (productivity, quality, time, cost, and retention). The end­-users needed a person who would support them on a routine basis. This person would serve as a mentor, coach, trainer, counselor, and trusted advisor to help them through complex imple­mentation issues. This person is called a super user. At the same time, super users would help develop the end-­users to become more valuable business team members—members with a broader vision and more complex skill sets, who could offer greater support in their organization.

Ginger realized that the cost of providing super users was much less than the savings that would be generated to make the software system more effective for the organization. She tested her theory in different organizations and was convinced that she had the right solution for the perplexing problem of large­scale systems implementation. Eventu­ally, Ginger founded the Super User Network and now spends much of her time preparing and developing super users to perform this essen­tial role in business departments worldwide.

Story from Show the Value of What You Do, Chapter 3, Page 45

• Begin With the End in Mind
• Define Impact
• Capture Value Before Being Asked

Example

MYTH: It’s almost impossible to connect most projects to business needs.

REALITY: Essentially, every project can be connected to a business need.

Chip Huth, the new leader of a SWAT team in the Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department, knew what he had to do. Citizen complaints against the team were excessive, averaging about 30–40 per year. They were also expensive, costing the department an average of $70,000 per complaint just for the investigations. The deputy chief (DC) who appointed Chip was clear—Chip needed to “clean up” the mess. The DC was concerned about optics from the complaints and the many irritations they were causing.

Expectations were vague, and the accepted remedy was poten­tially a “house cleaning” and subsequent creation of a new team. Chip knew what he was facing. He accepted the assignment because he loved working in teams. Initially, Chip didn’t believe the team could be “fixed.” Admittedly, Chip was completely self-centered in his thinking and simply loved the thrill of the work. He reassured the DC that he could whip the team into shape (not believing anyone could do so) and initially sought token improvements by addressing problem behaviors.

Unexpectedly, through a series of personal and professional encoun­ters, Chip was exposed to a personal improvement process called Out­ ward Mindset from the Arbinger Institute. Arbinger’s research indicates that people operate at any given time from one of two mindsets: an in­ ward mindset or an outward mindset. When operating with an inward mindset, you focus only on your own goals and objectives without con­sidering your impact on others. With an outward mindset, however, you see others as people who matter as much as you do. You consider their needs, challenges, and objectives. And you focus on collective results.

As Chip began applying the Outward Mindset framework to each area of his life, including his leadership responsibilities with the team, it seemed logical that this could impact the team. Although Chip was not certain that the Outward Mindset would deliver fewer complaints or build a better relationship with the community, he was willing to give it a try.

He introduced the team to this process. When they were exposed to it, they responded positively. The team asked Chip to lead them in applying the Outward Mindset skills and framework, in role­ modeling the behaviors, and showing them that it works. That was all Chip needed. He had the business measure, citizen complaints at roughly $70,000 each, the right solution, Outward Mindset, and the right people at the right time. He was ready to go.

Story from Show the Value of What You Do, Chapter 2, Page 29