No matching fragments found in this document.
it can have a very false picture.
Its own org's stats obscure those of the area orgs which may be dying.
Thus if you include a big function with a lot of small ones on a
combined graph you can get a very false idea.
Thus, graph big functions as themselves and keep them out of small
functions of the same kind.
The Continental Org should not be part of a Continental Exec Div's
statistics. Similarly SH stats should not be part of WW's.
A combined statistic is of course where you take the same stats from
several functions and add them up to one line. A very large function added
into a combined graph can therefore obscure bad situations. It can also
obscure a totally inactive senior management as the big function under its
own management may be wholly alert and competent but the senior management
is masked from view by this one going concern, whereas all its other points
except the big one may be collapsing.
THE BIGGEST MISTAKE
The one big godawful mistake an executive can make in reading and
managing by graph is being reasonable about graphs. This is called
JUSTIFYING A STATISTIC. This is the single biggest error in graph
interpretation by executives and the one thing that will clobber an org.
One sees a graph down and says "Oh well, of course, that's . . . . . .
. . ." and at that moment you've had it.
I have seen a whole org tolerate a collapsed Completions graph for
literally months because they all "knew the new type process wasn't working
well." The Tech Sec had JUSTIFIED his graph. The org bought it. None
thought to question it. When it was pointed out that with the same
processes the preceding Tech Sec had a continual high graph and a
suppressive was looked for it turned out to be the Tech Sec!
Never JUSTIFY why a graph continues to be down and never be reasonable
about it. A down graph is simply a down graph and somebody is goofing. The
only explanation that is valid at all is "What was changed just before it
fell? Good. Unchange it fast!" If a graph is down it can and must go up.
How it is going to go up is the only interest. "What did we do each time
the last few times just before it went up? Good. Do it!"
Justifying a graph is saying, "Well, graphs are always down in December
due to Christmas." That doesn't get it up or even really say why it's down!
And don't think you know why a graph is up or down without thorough
investigation. If it doesn't stay up or continues down then one didn't
know. It takes very close study on the ground where the work is done to
find why a graph suddenly rose or why it fell.
This pretended knowledge can be very dangerous. "The graph stays high
because we send out the XY Info Packet" as a snap judgment may result in
changing the Dissern Sec who was the real reason with his questionnaires.
And the graphs fall suddenly even though no Info Packet change occurred.
GROSS REASONS
Graphs don't fall or rise for tiny, obscure, hard to find reasons. As in
auditing, the errors are always BIG.
Book sales fall. People design new flyers for books, appropriate display
money, go