![\"\"](\"http:\/\/blogs.kent.ac.uk\/change-academy\/files\/2012\/03\/Blue-sky-landscape2.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n“The sky is not less blue because the blind man <\/em>doe<\/em>s not see it<\/em>.” (Danish proverb)<\/p>\n “Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please”<\/em> (Mark Twain)<\/p>\n “It is not the facts which guide the conduct of men, but their opinions about facts; which may be entirely wrong. We can only make them right by discussion”<\/em> (Sir Norman Angell)<\/p>\n Of course any person works and makes decisions using facts – don\u2019t they? In reality people can use, ignore, interpret or distort facts. An emphasis of ‘facts’ can sometimes actually disguise a lack of understanding or\u00a0 can be merely a knee-jerk demonstration of what a person sees as ‘effective’ management. In these cases the shortcomings are\u00a0 inevitable:<\/p>\n \u2018paralysis by analysis<\/strong>\u2019: an inability to consider options or initiatives if there are not facts to back-up the case. Analysis continues to be pursued ad infinitum<\/em> (many organisations have missed major opportunities as a result).<\/em><\/p>\n \u2018deferred decision-making<\/strong>\u2019: a continuation of paralysis by analysis. Decisions are only made when there is enough data to support them, so consequently no decision is EVER made.<\/p>\n \u2018If we can\u2019t measure it we can\u2019t manage it<\/strong>\u2019: a mentality which although apparently plausible is simply not true; it just gives an excuse for not attempting to manage difficult things like behaviour, culture, trust, respect, potential, commitment, opinion, loyalty and reputation: \u2018the sky is not less blue….<\/em>\u2019<\/p>\n \u2018Management by numbers<\/strong>\u2019: a command-and-control approach that expects people to jump through hoops to reach their targets. This only drives behaviour to get the numbers, but if those numbers measure the wrong things…<\/p>\n \u2018Game playing<\/strong>\u2019 (or at least one variant<\/em>): distorting numbers to make an argument (see Mark Twain\u2019s quote<\/em>); this can be creatively negative or positive, but both risk giving a warped sense of reality, and is an approach which is often fairly annoying for other people\u00a0 and undermines trust and collaboration.<\/p>\n For the university in the case study (and it is<\/strong><\/em> a real institution), successful management-by-fact required a fundamental foundation of<\/strong> shared values & mutual trust between colleagues<\/strong><\/em>. Trust is important \u2013 it helps to avoid playing games with numbers or using numbers as sticks to beat over the heads of other people. Trust enables us to look at the facts together and have a discussion (see Angell’s suggestion above<\/em>). We should use what we know and be ready to discuss the issues; as the case study university itself prefers to describe it; management with facts<\/strong><\/em>.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Further Reading:<\/p>\n Change Academy Recommended Resources, http:\/\/www.heacademy.ac.uk\/assets\/documents\/changeacademy\/2010\/Amended_resources\/ChangeAcademy-RecommendedResources.pdf<\/p>\n Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R.I. (2006) Why Managing by Facts Works, Strategy & Business enews, Booz & co. http:\/\/www.strategy-business.com\/media\/file\/enews-06-29-06.pdf<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In a recent discussion with colleagues, we considered the management approach taken by a progressive university in the US to enable change and improvement. One element of this change was a philosophy of ‘management by fact’. This particular university had found this approach to be helpful and made a difference to the way they made … Continue reading Management by fact or management WITH facts?<\/span>