El
tablero
de
comando
(Balanced
ScoreCard)
es
una
herramienta
muy
útil para
lograr
el
compromiso
de
la
gente
que
opera
en
las
empresas
en
todos los
niveles,
a fin
de
alcanzar
resultados
en
forma
consistente.
Sin
embargo,
implementar
esta
herramienta
tiene
sus
bemoles.
El
tablero
de
comando
es
un
instrumento
que
depende
de
la
Estrategia, la cual a su vez depende de la Misión que a su vez está subordinada a
la
Visión.
Para
graficar brevemente lo que estamos tratando, permítanme tomar un ejemplo. Pensemos
en una empresa PYME, del rubro alimenticio cuya dirección (el dueño y sus
asistentes más importantes) define la Visión
de la empresa:
“Ser líder en cubrir las necesidades de los
mercados que son desatendidos por las grandes empresas”.
A
partir de esta visión, se establece la Misión:
“Proveer en tiempo y forma el producto que
nuestro cliente necesite, a un costo
adecuado atendiendo la calidad y cantidad requerida”.
Como
consecuencia del establecimiento de la Visión y la Misión, se requiere una
estrategia para alcanzarlas y una serie de objetivos y un set de indicadores
que permitan seguir su implementación.
Para
facilitar el ejemplo nos vamos a enfocar en un único objetivo y veremos su
bajada en cascada hasta el operario que está en una máquina (el lugar mas
cercano a donde se originan los problemas):
Supongamos
que como consecuencia de la misión establecida, se desea minimizar el uso de
recursos, de por sí escasos, por unidad producida. Este objetivo se mide en forma global en la
fábrica a través de indicadores y se va haciendo cada vez más ajustado según el
área, máquina y operario, porque lo que se busca es que cada uno entienda y
asuma su responsabilidad en lograr el objetivo global.
Definición
de los objetivos para los indicadores en cascada:
o
Para la fábrica: Incrementar el rendimiento de las
líneas de producción (esfuerzo coordinado entre fabricación y envase) desde un
65% actual a un 71% esperado. El rendimiento n es calculado según esta formula:
o
n= PQ/Pn *100
o
Donde:
o
PQ = Toneladas de producto envasadas dentro de
especificaciones
o
Pn=
Toneladas que la misma maquina envasa funcionando
a velocidad nominal en el mismo tiempo.
o Para
el sector envase: Incrementar el rendimiento de la envasadora de un 70% a
un 75% (unidades envasadas en un mes). Con el fin de poder corregir al rumbo en
el proceso productivo lo antes posible, este objetivo mensual se subdivide en
objetivos semanales, luego en objetivos diarios y finalmente en objetivos por
turno.
o El rendimiento en envase se calcula
con la siguiente formula:
o
o n= (Nro de cajas envasadas con la calidad especifucada / Nro de cajas envasadas a velocidad nominal) * 100
o Para
el maquinista de la envasadora:
Alcanzar el número de cajas envasadas / Turno requeridas.
La
idea es que el responsable de la actividad que va a generar la mejora pueda
visualizar el resultado de las acciones que toma en el día a día sin estar
obligado a hacer cálculos complejos. En
nuestro ejemplo, el maquinista de la envasadora recibe un objetivo expresado en
número de cajas de producto a envasar dentro de norma en las 8 horas durante
las cuales está en la fábrica (objetivo en el que ya está calculado el 75%
esperado). Él y su equipo tomarán las
acciones necesarias para llegar al objetivo y, en lo posible, superarlo de modo
de trabajar más tranquilos el resto de la semana.
Claramente,
si queremos lograr el compromiso del personal, los objetivos deben cumplir la
regla SMART, es decir que deben ser:
S Simples
M Medibles
A Alcanzables
R Realistas
T referidos a un
período de Tiempo específico
Así
expuesto parece fácil, sin embargo lograr el compromiso de las personas es un tema
mayor. Para lograrlo es necesario
realizar una capacitación bien planificada e implementar un sistema evaluación
e información de resultados que permita a todo el personal comprender cuál es
el resultado del esfuerzo y participar en la planificación e implementación de
mejoras que sean necesarias para alcanzar el objetivo.
La
razón de la implementación de un BSC es establecer una guía que permita afrontar las distintas vicisitudes del día a día con una brújula (GPS en estos días) orientada al mediano y largo plazo en lugar del cortísimo plazo. Esto,
que
dicho
así
parece
una
obviedad,
no
lo
es
y ante
la necesidad de alinear tantas voluntades,
es
frecuente
encontrar
que el
establecimiento
formal
y
serio
de
la
visión
sólo se hace en medianas
y
grandes
empresas,
mientras que normalmente en las pequeñas
(y a veces en las medianas( empresas
no se hace y se pierden
oportunidades y la
posibilidad de tomas acciones al más bajo nivel que la hagan sustentables
en
el
largo
plazo.
Esto
no deja de ser una paradoja, ya que en la empresa grande normalmente hay una
gran distancia entre quien diseña la estrategia (normalmente el directorio) y el
operario de una máquina, a diferencia de la PYME donde es más normal que haya
una relación humana mucho más cercana entre el dueño y todos los niveles de la
organización.
Como
seres humanos, solemos creer que nuestro pensamiento es evidente y compartido
por todos y cuanto más cerca estamos de la gente que conforma nuestra
organización, este sentimiento se hace más fuerte.
Posiblemente
ésta puede ser una causa (entre muchas otras seguramente), de que no sea tan
frecuente encontrar en pequeñas empresas la declaración de la visión. Esto tiene serias consecuencias para la
empresa, ya que si no se formula explícitamente la visión y en consecuencia la estrategia a seguir, los problemas diarios dependerán del ambiente externo y, por lo tanto, los resultados estarán fuera del control de la empresa, impactando en
el
desempeño
actual
y
futuro.
Sin
embargo en el
mercado
argentino
hay
ejemplos
de
empresas
PYME
que
han
superado este escollo cultural y han establecido
una
visión
y
basándose
en
ella,
una
estrategia
de
largo
plazo
que
las
ha hecho
sustentables
aún
en
los
tiempos
difíciles
que
hemos
atravesado
reiteradamente. Convertir
estas excepciones en la regla es la tarea que debemos afrontar.
Según
Séneca:
“No
hay
viento
favorable
para
el
que
no
sabe
adonde
va”. No podremos manejar el día a día si
no conocemos nuestra visión, el por qué estamos aquí.
En
mi
larga
experiencia
en
empresas
multinacionales
y
mi
creciente
experiencia
en
PYMES
he
podido
observar
en
la
práctica
la
pérdida
de
valor (traducida en recursos
y
dinero)
que
se
genera
al
no
poder
establecer
un
tablero
de
comando
conocido
por
toda
la
organización,
que
permita
generar trabajo
en
equipo
alineando
las
expectativas
para
alcanzar
de
este
modo
los
resultados
más
exigentes.
Cuando
me
estaba
preparando
en
este
tema,
hace
unos
11
años
atrás,
un
gerente
de
una
fábrica
particularmente
exitosa
me
dijo:
“Francisco,
establecer un tablero de comando inteligente hacia el interior de la empresa hace la diferencia entre el trabajo en equipo y la competencia destructiva, entre la
alineación de voluntades y la anarquía”.
En mi
experiencia posterior pude comprobar en carne propia cuánta razón tenía este gerente.
El
Tablero de
Comando
cumple
un
rol
muy
importante en toda la
organización:
comunica
las
metas,
informa
sobre
el
avance
(“como
va
la
cosa”)
y,
un
aspecto
muy
importante,
permite
que la
gente
pueda ver cuáles
son
las
prioridades
de
la
empresa, cómo
va
a
ser
juzgado
el
desempeño
de
la
organización y el
departamento
al
que
pertenece
y,
en
las
empresas
con
estrategias
de
RRHH
más
avanzadas,
por cuáles
hechos
va
a
ser
juzgado
su
desempeño
individual.
Esta
es la información que el maquinista de la envasadora que describimos más arriba
comenzará a recibir y, en consecuencia empezará a “atajar” los problemas tan
pronto como aparezcan.
El
tablero
de
comando
en
sí
mismo
tiene
algunas
premisas que deben
cumplirse para lograr una catarata de responsabilidad efectiva a lo largo de la
empresa:
1.
Sólo
se
puede
mejorar
lo
que
se
puede
medir.
2.
La
medición
se
hace
para
mejorar
la
performance,
por
lo
tanto
lo
que se
busca son
soluciones
y
no
culpables.
3.
El
tablero
no
reemplaza
la
decisión
de
los
directivos,
sólo
provee
información en
forma
clara.
4.
Los
indicadores
del
Tablero
de
Comando
son
elegidos
por
la
alta
dirección
para
poder
gestionar
la
empresa
y
orientarla hacia
la
misión.
Creo
que
hacer
un
tablero
de
comando
efectivo es
un
arte.
En
la
experiencia
más
importante
en la cual
haya
participado,
esto
se
hizo
de
la
siguiente
manera:
1.
Se
realizó una reunión inicial con el Top Management de la empresa.
2.
Se
procedió a la revisión de la visión y la misión.
3.
Luego
se revisaron los
resultados
del
negocio
y
su
alineamiento
con
la
misión.
4.
Se
establecieron los
indicadores
del
tablero
de
comando
para
cada
área
funcional.
5.
Se
estableció el
tablero
de
comando
a
lo
largo
de
toda la
empresa,
utilizando
un
efecto
cascada.
6.
Mediante
el
efecto
cascada
se logró (con
dificultades, claro) que los indicadores macro se cumplieran, pero que a la vez, a cada responsable se le asignaran sólo aquellos indicadores relativos a su gestión y a sus objetivos.
La
implementación
de
un
tablero
de
comando
implica el compromiso de
todo el personal y por ende hace muy necesaria la capacitación a todo nivel para hacer posible la comprensión
del por qué de la
elección de este
sistema
y
cómo
operar
en
él.
Un
sistema
como
el
descripto
lleva
implícito
un
cambio
de
los
paradigmas
organizacionales,
transparentando
la
información y
entregando
los elementos
necesarios para
que
la
gente
en
su
puesto
de
trabajo
decida
y
lleve a cabo
las
acciones
que
conduzcan
al
resultado
esperado.
Personalmente,
me tocó llevar a cabo la implementación del BSC cuando era Jefe de Producción y
particularmente generó un gran cambio en mi modo de gestionar:
1.
Me
obligó a cambiar la forma en que me acercaba a la gente.
2.
Tuve
que capacitarme (en parte directamente por la empresa y en parte por mi cuenta
en cursos externos) y capacitar a todo el personal a mi alrededor en el cómo y
por qué se establecían los KPIś .
3.
Tuve
que establecer y llevar a cabo reuniones con todo mi equipo para la revisión de
KPIś y el establecimiento de planes de acción para alcanzar los objetivos.
En
suma, pasamos de una forma de conducción en la cual los objetivos y la
información eran manejados por unos pocos, a otra en la que esa información era
manejada por todos. Ese conocimiento
generalizado de los objetivos tuvo un gran impacto en la performance y generó
el trabajo en equipo que antes no aparecía.
Por
supuesto hubo que vencer varias barreras: temor, resistencia al cambio en
varios niveles, resistencia a compartir la información por miedo a las
consecuencias por parte de quienes la poseían y miedo a la responsabilidad que
implicaba o que imaginaban podía implicar poseer dicha información, por parte
de quienes iban a recibirla.
Tengo
claras las diferencias culturales entre una compañía grande y una empresa
pequeña, sin embargo creo que el desafío es similar para ambas culturas, ya que
los roles e intereses internos se repiten.
Como
todo cambio se requiere un líder que vea la oportunidad y decida tomarla y un
grupo de “apóstoles” que estén decididos a acompañarlo.
The Balanced ScoreCard is a useful tool to achieve the commitment of the people who operate in business at all levels, to achieve consistent results. However, implementing this tool is tricky.
The Balanced ScoreCard is a tool that depends on the strategy, which in turn depends on the mission which in turn is subordinate to the Vision.
To illustrate briefly what we are dealing with, let me take an example. Think of an SME in the food sector where the board (the owner and his most important assistants) defines the vision of the company:
"Being a leader in meeting the needs of the markets that are underserved by larger companies."
From this vision, they establish the Mission:
"Provide timely the product that our customer needs, at an adequate price fulfilling the quality and quantity required."
Following introduction of the Vision and Mission, a strategy is needed to achieve them and a number of objectives and a set of indicators to follow its implementation.
To facilitate the example we will focus on one goal and see its cascading down to the operator who is in a machine (the closest place to the problems) :
Suppose that
following the stated mission, we want to minimize the use of resources, already
scarce, per unit produced. This
objective is measured globally at the factory through indicators and is
becoming increasingly tight as the area, machine and operator, because what is
sought is that everyone understand and take responsibility to achieve the
overall objective.
Definition of targets for the indicators in cascade:
o For the factory: Increase the performance of production lines (coordinated effort between manufacturing and packaging from 65% today to 71% expected. Performance is calculated according to this formula:
Definition of targets for the indicators in cascade:
o For the factory: Increase the performance of production lines (coordinated effort between manufacturing and packaging from 65% today to 71% expected. Performance is calculated according to this formula:
- n= PQ/Pn *100
where:
n= Performance
PQ = Tons of packaged product within specifications
Pn = Tons packaged in the same machine running at nominal speed at the same time.
o For packaging sector: To increase the efficiency of the packaging from 70% to 75% (units packed in a month). In order to correct the direction in the production process as soon as possible, the monthly target is divided into weekly goals, daily goals and then finally turn objectives.
o The container yield is calculated using the following formula:
- n= (nr of boxes packed with specified quality/nr of boxes packed at nominal speed) * 100
o For the operator at the filler: Achieve
the number of boxes packed in the Time required.
The idea is that the person responsible for the activity that will generate the improvement can visualize the result of actions taken on the day to day without having to do complex calculations. In our example, the operator of the filler receives a target expressed in number of cases of product to be packaged in standard 8 hours during which he is at the factory is (goal that is already calculated with the 75% expected). He and his team take the actions necessary to reach the target and, if possible, overcome in order to work more quiet the rest of the week.
Clearly, if we want to achieve staff commitment, objectives should meet the SMART rule, ie they must be:
S Simple
M Measurable
A Attainable
A Realistic
T referred to a specific time period
It seems easy, but achieving the commitment of the people is a major issue. To do so required a well-planned training and implement an assessment and reporting of results to enable all staff understand what is the result of their effort and participate in planning and implementing the improvements needed to achieve the objective.
The reason for the implementation of a BSC is to establish a guide that will address the various vicissitudes of everyday life with a compass (GPS these days) that addresses the medium and long term rather than the very short term. This, it seems that the obvious, is not and the need to align so many wills, is common to find that the formal establishment and serious vision is only in medium and large companies, while typically in small (and sometimes even medium) companies are not made and lost opportunities and the ability to take actions at the lowest level that make it sustainable in the long term.
This looks to be a paradox, since in the large company there is usually a great distance between those who designed the strategy (usually the directory) and the operator of a machine, as opposed to SMEs where it is normal to have a human relationship much closer between the owner and all levels of the organization.
As humans, we tend to believe that our thinking is clear and shared by all and the closer we are the people who make our organization, this feeling becomes stronger.
Possibly this may be one reason (among many others surely) why it is not so often found in small companies the vision statement. This has serious consequences for the company, because if not explicitly mentioned the vision and therefore the strategy to follow, everyday problems depend on the external environment and, therefore, the results are beyond the control of the company, impacting current and future performance.
However, in the Argentine market are examples of SMEs companies that have overcome this cultural obstacle and have established a vision and building on it, a long-term strategy that has made sustainable even in the difficult times we have been through repeatedly. Convert these exceptions to the rule is the task we face.
According to Seneca: "There is no favorable wind for who does not know where he goes." We can not handle the day to day if we do not know our vision, why we are here.
In my long experience in multinational companies and my growing experience in SMEs I have observed in practice, the loss of value (translated in resources and money) that is generated by failing to establish a Balanced ScoreCard known throughout the organization which could generate teamwork aligning expectations thereby achieving the most demanding targets.
When I was training on this subject, about 11 years ago, a particularly successful factory manager told me, "Francisco, to establish a smart Balanced ScoreCard into the company makes the difference between teamwork and destructive competition, between the alignment of wills and anarchy.” In my subsequent experience I witnessed firsthand how right the manager was.
The Balanced Scorecard plays an important role throughout the organization communicates the goals, progress reports ("how is going on") and a very important aspect, allows people to see what the company prioritizes, how it will be judged the performance of the organization and the department to which he belongs and in companies with more advanced HR strategies, by which facts his individual performance will be judged.
This is information that the operator of the packaging that I described above will begin to receive and thus begin to "address" the problems as soon as they appear.
The Balanced ScoreCard itself has some assumptions that must be met to achieve a cascade of effective accountability throughout the company:
1. You can only improve what can be measured.
2. The measurement is done to improve performance, so what you are looking for solutions, not blame.
3. The board does not replace the decision of the directors, only provides information clearly.
4. The Scorecard indicators are chosen by senior management to manage the company while refocusing the mission.
I think doing an effective Balanced ScoreCard is an art. In the most important experience in which I participated, this was done as follows:
1. We performed an initial meeting with the Top Management of the company.
2. We proceeded to review the vision and mission.
3. Then we reviewed the results of the business and its alignment with the mission.
4. Indicators were established on the Balanced ScoreCard for each functional area.
5. It was established the Balanced ScoreCard along the entire enterprise, using a cascade effect.
6. By cascading effect was achieved (with difficulty, of course) that the macro indicators were met, but at the same time, each manager will be assigned only those indicators relating to its management and its objectives.
Implementing a balanced scorecard involves the commitment of all staff and therefore makes it necessary to train at all levels to enable understanding of why the choice of this system and how to operate it.
A system as described implies a change in organizational paradigms; making transparent the information and providing the necessary elements for people in their jobs to decide and carry out actions that lead to the expected result.
Personally, I had to carry out the implementation of the BSC as a Production Manager and particularly produced a great change in the way I manage:
1. It forced to me to change the way I approached people.
2. I had to enable me (in part directly by the company and partly on my own in external courses) and training to all staff around me in the how and why the KPIs were established.
3. I had to establish and conduct meetings with my team for the review of KPIs and establishing action plans to achieve objectives.
In short, we change from a management where the objectives and information were handled by a few, to one in which that information was handled by everyone. This widespread awareness of the objectives had a great impact on performance and generated teamwork that didn’t appeared before.
Of course we had to overcome several barriers: fear, resistance to change on several levels, resistance to sharing information for fear of consequences by those who possess it and fear of responsibility implied or imagined having such information could involve, for from those who were to receive it.
I have clear idea of cultural differences between a big company and a small company, however I think the challenge is similar for both cultures, because roles and domestic interests repeat in both organizations.
As any changes it requires a leader who sees the opportunity and decide to take it and a group of "apostles" who are determined to accompany him.
The idea is that the person responsible for the activity that will generate the improvement can visualize the result of actions taken on the day to day without having to do complex calculations. In our example, the operator of the filler receives a target expressed in number of cases of product to be packaged in standard 8 hours during which he is at the factory is (goal that is already calculated with the 75% expected). He and his team take the actions necessary to reach the target and, if possible, overcome in order to work more quiet the rest of the week.
Clearly, if we want to achieve staff commitment, objectives should meet the SMART rule, ie they must be:
S Simple
M Measurable
A Attainable
A Realistic
T referred to a specific time period
It seems easy, but achieving the commitment of the people is a major issue. To do so required a well-planned training and implement an assessment and reporting of results to enable all staff understand what is the result of their effort and participate in planning and implementing the improvements needed to achieve the objective.
The reason for the implementation of a BSC is to establish a guide that will address the various vicissitudes of everyday life with a compass (GPS these days) that addresses the medium and long term rather than the very short term. This, it seems that the obvious, is not and the need to align so many wills, is common to find that the formal establishment and serious vision is only in medium and large companies, while typically in small (and sometimes even medium) companies are not made and lost opportunities and the ability to take actions at the lowest level that make it sustainable in the long term.
This looks to be a paradox, since in the large company there is usually a great distance between those who designed the strategy (usually the directory) and the operator of a machine, as opposed to SMEs where it is normal to have a human relationship much closer between the owner and all levels of the organization.
As humans, we tend to believe that our thinking is clear and shared by all and the closer we are the people who make our organization, this feeling becomes stronger.
Possibly this may be one reason (among many others surely) why it is not so often found in small companies the vision statement. This has serious consequences for the company, because if not explicitly mentioned the vision and therefore the strategy to follow, everyday problems depend on the external environment and, therefore, the results are beyond the control of the company, impacting current and future performance.
However, in the Argentine market are examples of SMEs companies that have overcome this cultural obstacle and have established a vision and building on it, a long-term strategy that has made sustainable even in the difficult times we have been through repeatedly. Convert these exceptions to the rule is the task we face.
According to Seneca: "There is no favorable wind for who does not know where he goes." We can not handle the day to day if we do not know our vision, why we are here.
In my long experience in multinational companies and my growing experience in SMEs I have observed in practice, the loss of value (translated in resources and money) that is generated by failing to establish a Balanced ScoreCard known throughout the organization which could generate teamwork aligning expectations thereby achieving the most demanding targets.
When I was training on this subject, about 11 years ago, a particularly successful factory manager told me, "Francisco, to establish a smart Balanced ScoreCard into the company makes the difference between teamwork and destructive competition, between the alignment of wills and anarchy.” In my subsequent experience I witnessed firsthand how right the manager was.
The Balanced Scorecard plays an important role throughout the organization communicates the goals, progress reports ("how is going on") and a very important aspect, allows people to see what the company prioritizes, how it will be judged the performance of the organization and the department to which he belongs and in companies with more advanced HR strategies, by which facts his individual performance will be judged.
This is information that the operator of the packaging that I described above will begin to receive and thus begin to "address" the problems as soon as they appear.
The Balanced ScoreCard itself has some assumptions that must be met to achieve a cascade of effective accountability throughout the company:
1. You can only improve what can be measured.
2. The measurement is done to improve performance, so what you are looking for solutions, not blame.
3. The board does not replace the decision of the directors, only provides information clearly.
4. The Scorecard indicators are chosen by senior management to manage the company while refocusing the mission.
I think doing an effective Balanced ScoreCard is an art. In the most important experience in which I participated, this was done as follows:
1. We performed an initial meeting with the Top Management of the company.
2. We proceeded to review the vision and mission.
3. Then we reviewed the results of the business and its alignment with the mission.
4. Indicators were established on the Balanced ScoreCard for each functional area.
5. It was established the Balanced ScoreCard along the entire enterprise, using a cascade effect.
6. By cascading effect was achieved (with difficulty, of course) that the macro indicators were met, but at the same time, each manager will be assigned only those indicators relating to its management and its objectives.
Implementing a balanced scorecard involves the commitment of all staff and therefore makes it necessary to train at all levels to enable understanding of why the choice of this system and how to operate it.
A system as described implies a change in organizational paradigms; making transparent the information and providing the necessary elements for people in their jobs to decide and carry out actions that lead to the expected result.
Personally, I had to carry out the implementation of the BSC as a Production Manager and particularly produced a great change in the way I manage:
1. It forced to me to change the way I approached people.
2. I had to enable me (in part directly by the company and partly on my own in external courses) and training to all staff around me in the how and why the KPIs were established.
3. I had to establish and conduct meetings with my team for the review of KPIs and establishing action plans to achieve objectives.
In short, we change from a management where the objectives and information were handled by a few, to one in which that information was handled by everyone. This widespread awareness of the objectives had a great impact on performance and generated teamwork that didn’t appeared before.
Of course we had to overcome several barriers: fear, resistance to change on several levels, resistance to sharing information for fear of consequences by those who possess it and fear of responsibility implied or imagined having such information could involve, for from those who were to receive it.
I have clear idea of cultural differences between a big company and a small company, however I think the challenge is similar for both cultures, because roles and domestic interests repeat in both organizations.
As any changes it requires a leader who sees the opportunity and decide to take it and a group of "apostles" who are determined to accompany him.
Imprimir
