Last month, Anand Giridharadas wrote skeptically and provokingly in the New York Times about the ubiquitous use of quantifiable measures.  His piece reminded me how important it is to get metrics right.

The primary problem with the implementation of any quantifiable measure – or metric – is that they measure unimportant (or worse, counter-productive) activities.  Witness large bank executives getting huge bonuses because they met certain quantifiable goals all the while their banks were failing miserably.

So, how do you develop metrics that encourage people to be their best and add more value to your organization?  How do you develop metrics that support long-held best practices and values of good development work?  The key is to make sure the measurements are aligned with the behaviors and outcomes that are truly valued and advance the entire organization.

In other words, make sure that the “quant supports the quaint.”

To define “the quaint” in your organization start with three simple questions:

1. What does our organization value? Are there specifics values identified at your organization as important to constituent service and establishing your brand (example:  serve constituents effectively)?  If so, any metrics should encourage and support these values.
2. What does our department/division value? Are there specific values identified at the departmental or divisional level (example:  teamwork)?  Again, if so, any metrics should encourage and support these values.
3. What do we value as development professionals in working with donors?  Are there values – such as securing face-to-face visits with donors, embracing a donor-centric approach, or using resources efficiently – that your team agrees are important?  If so, any metrics should encourage and support these values.

Staying quaint while going quant means that we first remind ourselves which behaviors, activities, and outcomes we value and wish to encourage.  When your metrics program is built to support the specific answers to these 3 questions, you can be assured that the quant will support the quaint.

For years I have helped leaders and teams create and implement performance metrics so I know in each audience there are a small percentage who can be turned off by the topic.  My sense has always been that they struggle to reconcile the adoption of a for-profit management strategy in the non-profit sector.

Non-profits and for-profits are different.  Non-profits serve different purposes, have different organizational models, and operate with different values as compared to our friends in the for-profit sector.  These differences don’t necessarily mean that we can’t learn from one another.  But some think this way.

And because the phrase “performance metrics” can conjure up feelings of cold, uncaring, bureaucracies, those folks think this concept is especially misplaced in the warm, cozy world of non-profit work – especially non-profit development work.  You may know a few folks  like this in your own shop!

But performance metrics in the non-profit arena can work – exceedingly well. However, in order for performance metrics to encourage the best possible development efforts there are three “foundations” that must be present.  These foundations are primary beliefs, perspectives, and cultural components that either the leader must hold or the team must hold collectively.

Here, then, are the Foundation for Performance Metrics:

• A Belief in Disparate Rewards – Do you believe that team members who are fairly and accurately assessed and produce exceptional results should be rewarded for their work?  Even if the reward is not financial, is the concept of merit-based rewards one that resonates with you?  If not, then a performance metrics system is probably not for you.
• An Understanding of Values – What does your organization value?  What does your team value in its work with donors?  These are two key questions that must be answered prior to establishing a performance metrics system.  If these questions aren’t answered with a good amount of team consensus, you run the risk of implementing a performance metrics system which is injurious to the organization, your team members, and your relationships with donors.
• A Belief That Every Team Member Should Be Encouraged To Be Their Best – If you do not believe that the organization’s success will ultimately be built on encouraging each individual to be her best, then you probably don’t want to implement a performance metrics system.

The phrase “performance metrics” can cause some in your organization discomfort.   And the establishment of a performance metrics system can serve as a breakpoint moment for many on your team.

Those on your team who believe that rewards should be based on effort and productivity, who are willing to embrace important values, and who subscribe to the notion that every person should be encouraged to be their very best will flourish in a well-design metrics system.  For anyone else, a more important conversation might be in order.