Outcome management is one of the most effective forms of management, which is easy to apply and hard to execute since it requires honesty and working to the limit. In this situation, the application of features of outcome management can be detrimental to the company. At a critical moment, the firm does not seek to achieve results in the activity but to continue functioning as a process, which is not a fundamental measurable goal.
In fact, result-based management seeks to develop a company goal that is not important for the entire organization. For example, a store needs to achieve revenue growth of 5% per month. While the people interacting directly with customers may be focused on achieving results, the other part of the firm, often referred to as the ‘back office’, will not be able to be effectively evaluated in terms of achieving the goal (IBM, n.d.). The reason for this division is that some parts of the organization are not created to achieve goals but to keep the firm running smoothly. Based on this argument, the critical department in the example needs to maintain the work, which would be impossible to implement by exchanging data in excel. Instead, it can be argued that some part of the organization should be put on the management system, while the vital unit of the company will deal with the issue of organizing constant work in the company.
To conclude, measured outcome management might be an efficient tool in leading a specific company’s unit that should achieve its goals regularly. At the same time, there is a part of the company whose performance is already a goal, so it cannot be measured. In this situation, it was recommended to transfer some aspects of the store management to outcome management while analyzing the possibilities of integrating employees into important company departments to ensure its performance.
Reference
IBM. (n.d.). What is outcome management? International Brain Machines. Web.