Indicators, targets, benchmarks - sorting out the terminology November 27, 2007
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Outcomes systems architecture, Outcomes theory, Indicators, Measurement, Using the approach , add a commentMany different terms are used in the outcomes and performance management area for measurement and indicators. Often there is considerable confusion about these terms. The short definitions I use from outcomes theory are:
- Outcomes - causes or effects in the real world. Whether or not such causes can be measured is a separate issue (see previous blog for features of outcomes)
- Steps - lower level causes which lead to higher-level outcomes. Because causal processes reside in causal hierarchies, outcomes at one level can be steps for achieving even higher-level outcomes, therefore to refer to causes and effects at any level the general term ‘outcomes and steps’ is used.
- Measurements - measure whether or not an outcome or step has occurred (or how much of it has occurred).
- Indicator - a measurement of an outcome or step.
- Target - a level on an indicator.
- Benchmark - levels on indicators already achieved by other players, or by the same player at an earlier time or in another setting.
- Priorities - an outcome or step which is thought to be the most important for a player to focus their efforts on changing.
When should measurements appear in an outcomes model? September 21, 2007
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Measurement , add a commentOne of the important principles of outcomes theory reflected in the Easy Outcomes approach is that measurements should be kept separate from outcomes in outcomes models. DoView outcomes software is structured to let you do this. This is important because it frees you up from just focusing on the measurable and encourages you to focus on the important - the outcomes you’re trying to achieve. Measurement is always vital, but it should follow on after you’ve specified the outcomes you are trying to achieve. The classic example of where a measurement has inappropriately taken over an outcomes model is Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Sometimes targets are set for a country in terms of the GDP league table. A country would be better off identifying an economic, social and environmental outcome and then look at the best way of measuring these rather than single-mindedly pursuing growth in GDP at the expense of all else.
Opening up a gap between outcomes and their measurement allows the possibility that better means of measuring an outcome may be developed in the future. This also opens up the discussion of what is described in some of the social sciences as the reliability and validity of measures. Reliability is how reproducible a measure is - will different observers come up with roughly the same levels on a measure while validity is whether or not the measure is actually measuring the outcome. In the real world there is often a trade-off between these two and its often important to be aware of this measurement issue. (more…)