Daily Management and the Performance Dialogue

Why it matters

Daily management is a routine of regularly seeing how the work is going and responding to deviation. A full board does not show that the routine works. The link management needs runs from the expected result to the observed result, and from there to the decision taken. In the results dialogue, instead of everyone describing all of their activities, the discussion states which condition broke the target and who will examine it. When the result falls below target, blaming the worker produces no information. When it exceeds target, it is questioned whether the extra output was actually needed. The dialogue should add a clear decision for the coming work on top of the result that has already happened.

A small number of indicators is more useful than many colors when their definitions are clear. On-time delivery shows the share of due deliveries completed at the promised time. First-time-right tracks the output accepted without rework. Inventory turnover compares the annual cost of goods sold with the average inventory on the same valuation basis. These indicators have different units and periods. That they appear together on a daily board does not mean they are all calculated daily. Each box should show the start and end of the period, the time of the last update and the person responsible for the data. Otherwise an old inventory ratio can cover up a current delivery problem.

A result is not the same as a cause. Output below target is a result; a late material delivery is only a candidate cause once it is supported by a record. A breakdown on the same day does not prove that the whole gap came from the breakdown either. The time of the event, the affected product and the lost capacity are compared. The daily dialogue does not have to find the root cause of every problem immediately; it should leave the unknown part and the responsibility for the investigation open. That openness separates a temporary safeguard from a lasting fix. Re-sequencing to protect delivery may work today; whether it prevents the material delay from recurring must be tested separately.

A good dialogue is valuable not because it is short but because it reliably makes the decision that is needed. Increasing the number of meetings does not count as success while open actions pile up. Over time, the daily records show where the same problems recur; however, different product mixes and changing targets must be explained. The daily deviation and the period total are read together. Extra output made later does not retroactively repair a missed delivery date. For this reason the performance dialogue looks not only at the total quantity but also at flow, quality and the promised time. An improvement in one indicator is not assumed to have silently made up for a deterioration in another.

While making explanation easier, the board must not create false certainty. An indicator meeting its target does not prove that the whole process is trouble-free; results it does not cover are investigated separately. Exposing the worker of the day that missed the target also weakens a reliable data flow. Person codes are used to establish responsibility, not to reduce the reason for performance to a person. The person leading the dialogue should openly admit what is unknown, ask for the necessary record and respond to requests for support. A worker reporting a problem early is not treated as if it had produced a negative result. This behavior is necessary for the action to start on time. If the clarity of the indicators and the confidence to report problems are protected together, the records stop being mere reporting material and become a reliable basis for the daily decision.

Formula