By Jesus P. Estanislao
To make progress along the Performance Governance System (PGS) pathway, an enterprise has to cascade its enterprise road map and performance scorecards, and ask lower-level units to align their own road maps and performance scorecards with those of the enterprise as a whole.
The experience of the Philippine Navy in crafting these subsidiary performance scorecards is narrated by Commodore Giovanni Bacordo, as follows: “I was then the Director of the Center for Naval Leadership and Excellence (the PN’s OSM) when we started with the unit scorecards of the Philippine Fleet and the Philippine Marine Corps in CY 2009 – 2010. These are the Navy’s major commands. I soon came upon the realization that while crafting the unit balanced scorecard is not rocket science, it is also not as easy as A-B-C or 1-2-3. It is a challenge.”
How then can the challenge be addressed? Commodore Bacordo gives an answer from the Navy experience: “Several workshops were resorted to, with the assistance of the Institute for Solidarity in Asia (ISA), before we had a draft of these two units’ balanced scorecard. To fine-tune these scorecards, more workshops and focused discussion groups were also organized. But even as these 2nd-level scorecards were being finalized,the same process was followed with the 3rd level PN units, i.e. those under the Philippine Fleet, and separately those under the Philippine Marine Corps. Thus, towards the end of CY 2011, operational commands, support commands and other PN units already had, at least, a first draft of their balanced scorecard.”
All of the above took a considerable amount of time. It also demanded a deep commitment from the top leadership of the Philippine Navy. After all, the effort was enormous; it covered all operating units of the PN; and it involved the participation of virtually all PN personnel, from the highest ranking officers and down to the last civilian employee. The essential ingredient demanded on the part of all was a basic understanding of where the Philippine Navy was going, and how it intended to build itself up as a “strong and credible Navy our maritime nation can be proud of.”
With understanding came the call to participation. The Navy leadership was in fact challenging each unit of the PN to specify — given the general direction of the Navy and the broad profile of what it was aiming to become — what they would contribute to the realization of the enterprise vision. They were asked: how would you align all your plans and programs so they would contribute towards the most effective pursuit of the Navy’s strategic objectives and priorities? In effect, every PN unit was asked to think of what they were doing in relation to the over-all Sail Plan of the Navy. Each unit could no longer plan and operate as though they were separate, independent silos without much inter-connection with other Navy units; instead, they all had to think Navy-wide.
This type of thinking did not stop at the level of the Navy’s operating and working units. It went further down to the last individual Navy person. Commodore Bacordo observes: “With the unit balanced scorecard in place, it did not take very long before individual members of Team Navy started to draft their personal scorecards. And as before, workshops, seminars and focused discussion groups were the tools the Navy deployed to ensure that each Navy person would really understand what “scorecarding” was all about. By April 2016, each member of Team Navy already had their individualpersonal scorecards.”
In concept, everyone in the Philippine Navy was aligned with the Navy Sail Plan.
All Credit Goes There : Source link