As I wrote my last blog posting, I became aware that performance measurement issues are also affected by the five levels of leadership. At the personal leadership level, annual performance reviews are all about how well we function as professionals. These performance reviews concern our work performance for the past year and recommendations about how to improve our performance in the future. The Gallup organization argues that these reviews should be based on our talents and how to make our talents work in a positive way for us. At the team level, performance relates to how teams reach their objectives and the whole issue of high performance. High performing teams are built on trust, mastering conflict, achieving commitment, embracing accountability, and focusing on results(Lencioni).
At the organization level in public health, performance is measuring by the adherence to the core functions and essential services of public health and how agencies measure this. At the organization level, performance is tied to results. Performance is also tied to continuous quality improvement. Some writers view performance from the perspective of customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, market share, level of productivity, service performance, and growth. At the level of community, it is important to view the impact of collaboration and improvement of the status of the health of the population. For public health, the attainment and improvement in addressing the actions tied to carrying out the core functions and essential public health services also comes into play.
The final level relates to the activities of the profession. Performance is measured more at the qualitative level here. Delivery of papers, poster sessions, serving on regional, state, or national committees are all important measures of performance.
It has been my purpose in this posting to point out that we need to avoid simple explanations of what performance measurement is . It occurs at multiple levels and needs to be seen from a systems perspective.