What Does a KPI Performance Owner Do?

A KPI or measure needs one named performance owner — not a committee. Here’s what they’re actually responsible for, and what they’re not.

The best and most meaningful performance measure in the world can be rendered utterly useless if no one is clear about who should interpret and use it. Likewise, too many cooks spoil the broth. If everyone tries to take control over improving the same area of performance, then time, effort, and resources will almost certainly be wasted.

Each measure needs a specific and named performance owner. And the most appropriate person to be the performance owner of a particular measure is the person who is responsible for managing the process, function, or activity that the measure is monitoring.

That person knows how to ensure the measure is reported accurately, has knowledge of the area of the business the measure is monitoring, and, most importantly, is in a position to make decisions about how to improve that performance.

A performance owner is responsible for 3 specific things

Being the owner of a measure means taking on three cornerstone behaviours that drive the measure toward its intended result:

1. Monitoring the measure over time, including coordinating timely access to the data with the data owner, consistent calculation of the measure values with the definition owner, and timely reporting with the reporting owner (more about these additional three owner types here)
2. Interpreting its trends and patterns and seeking causes for them, including communicating this information to people affected by that performance or who contribute to it
3. Initiating action to improve performance, including following up to be sure that actions are having the desired effect on performance and moving it toward its target

The performance owner is NOT the person whose bum gets kicked should the performance measure go in the wrong direction, or the target is missed.

No one person can be completely responsible for the actual values of a measure because the measure’s values are almost always based on the interplay of many factors, most of which are outside the control of any one person. These are factors like organisational process and system design, policies, work procedures, and the actions of other people (who are human and imperfect).

So focusing blame on one person is focusing attention away from the real causes — and the real opportunities — for improving performance. What’s the use of holding the call centre manager responsible for a measure of Average Handling Time (the average time it takes to handle customer enquiries) when that time is largely dependent on the quality of products and services that other departments in the company are delivering?

Collaboration, not blame, fixes problems.

Giving ownership of a particular performance measure to someone does not exclude others from taking a role in monitoring, interpreting, or improving the performance it tracks. The performance owner is simply the person who has the best experience, skill, and knowledge to lead the interpretation of and response to the measure.

So we always make doubly sure that the owner of a performance measure has the knowledge, experience, skill, and authority to monitor, interpret, and respond to their measure. This matters at every level in the organisation, including executive level accountabilities for KPIs.

How does ownership of KPIs or performance measures happen in your organisation?

• Is the meaning of measure ownership clear?
• Is the appropriate person chosen to own each measure?
• Is accountability a trigger for blame, or for collaborative performance improvement?