Who can Change goals and kpi of top management?

Q

QAMTY

Hi everybody
Is it possible and supported by the standard (ISO 9001 2008) That Only the general director can change goals and kpis?everyone in a system is responsible of theír process, the Director can change goals of the other processes, but te ones of the director only can be changed by him.
What is your opinion?
Thanks
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
FWIW, I worked for an organization that did not change the goals/KPIs until the next annual planning cycle. For better or for worse, when those goals and metrics were decided upon, it was based upon information known at the time. Unfortunately, from time to time, those "unknown unknowns" appear and suddenly we find ourselves outside of our control limits and/or range or we fail to achieve our goal. Kinda makes us feel crappy...frustrated...and a tad embarrassed.

That said, lessons learned. Maybe we shouldn't have so "based on historical performance" when we did our goal setting. Maybe we didn't recognize a new emerging market trend. For right or for wrong, these are our goals.

So you fail to hit your target this month...explain. And you fail to hit it again next month...explain (maybe there's a different reason...maybe not). And you fail to hit it again...explain (and oooooh, at least we're starting to move in the right direction again).

Failure to hit a goal is not a bad thing. It is simply reality.

There is still data to be looked at and analyzed.

Plans can still be good and move forward.

Changing the goal isn't an isolated action. The consequences can cascade to other metrics not to mention perceptions of leadership - "Oh, it's okay for him to move the goal but I still have to bust my butt to meet this lame metric?!?!"

I realize that my response does not address the original question, but I do hope that your organization will reconsider changing the goals. It is what it is (I really do hate that phrase), and yet there is still a lot that can be done despite not reaching the original target.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
... but the ones of the director only can be changed by him.
What is your opinion?
Thanks

Thinking a bit more about this...the goals and KPIs of a Director (assuming that this means "Top Guy") don't really ever change.

The goal and KPI of the "Top Guy" is simple and singular: Net Profit After Tax. It doesn't really ever change.

All other goals in a for-profit corporation funnel into this one, be they throughput, sales, pricing, quality, support, maintenance, food service or janitorial.
 

Kronos147

Trusted Information Resource
The goal and KPI of the "Top Guy" is simple and singular: Net Profit After Tax.

Ouch!

ISO 9001:2015 has nothing in it about finance. In establishing scope, organizations should also describe boundaries.

To my organization and consultation clients, I advise making financials a boundary in the QMS. I state something to the effect the Financial management information is used to shape the strategy and objectives, but is outside the scope of the QMS, and hence, auditors keep you hands off.

FWIW!

Cheers,
Kronos
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
Ouch! <big snip>...... Financial management information is used to shape the strategy and objectives, but is outside the scope of the QMS

Your point is well taken, thanks. I feel sometimes like the token capitalist on this forum...and again so now.

My :2cents:
Financial information is the GOAL of the strategies. It is the ultimate objective.
There are only two categories of companies ... for profit and not for profit...and those are actually great and fully accurate titles.

a qms is worth having because it increases NPAT. If it does not increase NPAT, it is not worth having.
I've commented on a thread here regarding ceasing ISO certification. ..totally understandable if the net benefit is less than the cost.

For all of the nitty gritty of compliance and calibration and control and records and all the other schlock. ...if a system yields less benefit than it costs, you pitch it. Why?...because your company exists for one reason alone....NPAT.

ouch...maybe...but this is reality.
A company does not exist to employ employees.
A company does not exist to serve customers.
A company does not exist to serve a market or to advance technology.
A for profit corporation exists "for profit".

How much better quality, culture, and customer service would we all have if everyone understood this simple point. It may shock a few folks....but it sure would help...

Gee...can you tell I'm in top management? :tg:
 
Top Bottom