In a report, titled "What it takes to change government" released today and cited by Joe Davidson in the Federal Diary section of the Washington Post there are some very intriguing observations. One in particular touches on this topic of measuring success. In comparing successful leaders and programs with those that were not it states, "Few leaders in the unsuccessful group measured performance, and when they did, the measures focused on cost and production, but neglected quality and customer satisfaction, according to the report. Those who succeeded measured performance in their agencies as a way to communicate goals, delegate authority and establish accountability." With that in mind I think it highlights the flaw in the current approach around measuring the effectiveness of the grant programs. By focusing on costs as the key measurement method we miss the truly important criteria of success - quality, customer satisfaction and resilience. Focusing on cost is also a trifle absurd, we are talking about a grant program that even at 4 billion per year is barely 1% of the total State and Local expenditures for Public Safety in the nation. At 1% it certainly helps but it is hardly enough for us to expect a significant return on investment in money terms but we can expect huge returns in achieving the goals of national preparedness, response integration and resilience.
Disaster Zone
by Eric Holdeman: Emergency management in the blogosphere
by Eric Holdeman: Emergency management in the blogosphere
Subscribe via RSS | About this Blog | Contact Eric Holdeman | Blog Roll
Mike Byrne left a comment on my earlier posting about measuring success in how we as a nation are using the homeland security funds that are being provided. I thought his comment below was significant enough that it should not be buried in the blog--so I highlight it here.
In a report, titled "What it takes to change government" released today and cited by Joe Davidson in the Federal Diary section of the Washington Post there are some very intriguing observations. One in particular touches on this topic of measuring success. In comparing successful leaders and programs with those that were not it states, "Few leaders in the unsuccessful group measured performance, and when they did, the measures focused on cost and production, but neglected quality and customer satisfaction, according to the report. Those who succeeded measured performance in their agencies as a way to communicate goals, delegate authority and establish accountability." With that in mind I think it highlights the flaw in the current approach around measuring the effectiveness of the grant programs. By focusing on costs as the key measurement method we miss the truly important criteria of success - quality, customer satisfaction and resilience. Focusing on cost is also a trifle absurd, we are talking about a grant program that even at 4 billion per year is barely 1% of the total State and Local expenditures for Public Safety in the nation. At 1% it certainly helps but it is hardly enough for us to expect a significant return on investment in money terms but we can expect huge returns in achieving the goals of national preparedness, response integration and resilience.
Top
In a report, titled "What it takes to change government" released today and cited by Joe Davidson in the Federal Diary section of the Washington Post there are some very intriguing observations. One in particular touches on this topic of measuring success. In comparing successful leaders and programs with those that were not it states, "Few leaders in the unsuccessful group measured performance, and when they did, the measures focused on cost and production, but neglected quality and customer satisfaction, according to the report. Those who succeeded measured performance in their agencies as a way to communicate goals, delegate authority and establish accountability." With that in mind I think it highlights the flaw in the current approach around measuring the effectiveness of the grant programs. By focusing on costs as the key measurement method we miss the truly important criteria of success - quality, customer satisfaction and resilience. Focusing on cost is also a trifle absurd, we are talking about a grant program that even at 4 billion per year is barely 1% of the total State and Local expenditures for Public Safety in the nation. At 1% it certainly helps but it is hardly enough for us to expect a significant return on investment in money terms but we can expect huge returns in achieving the goals of national preparedness, response integration and resilience.
Latest Emergency Management News
FEMA's Ready Campaign Refocused on Disaster Planning; Set for Reassessment
National Preparedness Month aims to prepare the nation’s citizens and businesses for natural and manmade disasters.
National Preparedness Month aims to prepare the nation’s citizens and businesses for natural and manmade disasters.
Citizen Corps Announces Award Winners
Awards recognize innovation at the state and local levels in areas including preparedness and volunteer-first responder integration.
Awards recognize innovation at the state and local levels in areas including preparedness and volunteer-first responder integration.
Schools Receive $29 Million in Preparedness Grants
Grants will fund an interoperable communications network, safety audits and staff training.
Grants will fund an interoperable communications network, safety audits and staff training.
Latest Blog Posts
Short Term Job Prognosis--Bleak!Sep 03 I have a philosophy that sometimes leaders have to exhibit what I call "False Enthusiasm."…
National Citizen Corps AwardsSep 02 FEMA has announced the 2010 National Citizen Corps Achievement Awards These awards span very large to…
More Mainsteam Media Attention for Alerts and NotificationsSep 02 For the second time in the past months, emergency notification has received a nice plug…







