Connect the dots: A series of musings and commentaries on local politics and management

Universal Performance Factors for General managers

Some of the business strategies of late at Department of Water and Power are difficult to understand. To understand them, one needs to look at change over a period of time – Where were we (then) and where are we (now). Of course, this type of analysis lends itself particularly well in evaluating leadership, organizational culture, and a concept commonly referred to as “continuous improvement” or lack there of, as the case may be.

There is circular axiom in management. It goes something like this,

“Without standards, there is no measurement. Without measurement, there is no direction. And, without direction, there is no leadership. Leadership therefore begins with an articulated vision, enumerated goals and objectives, and a measurement of ones accomplishments with respect to those goals and objectives.”

During Richard Riordan’s term as Mayor of Los Angeles, Riordan accepted a dollar a year for his public service. He demonstrated integrity. He established standards of performance, and held City managers accountable. One of Riordan’s first executive directives was Executive Directive No. 2000-2 entitled Universal Performance Factors for General Managers. It first established his responsibility to evaluate the performance of his managers. Further, it set forth goals on which City managers were going to be evaluated, namely vision, leadership, and accountability.

James K. Hahn term as Mayor of Los Angeles has been quite a change from the former mayor. Notwithstanding a significant increase in compensation, Hahn’s public service has been marked by public scandal and Federal investigation. Probably the most relevant management change that Hahn has made during his term as mayor is that the standards of performance are gone. It is as though the performance factors never existed and remain just outside the reach of public consciousness.

The most significant difference between these two administrations is the interpretation of Charter Section 508(d), with regards to Mayoral responsibilities to evaluate the performance of chief administrative officers [general managers]. Former Mayor Riordan saw these as personal responsibilities. Hahn has transferred these responsibilities to others in the form of mayoral appointments, blame, and blue-ribbon review committees.

Mayor Hahn has chosen not to establish standards of performance for his appointments, per se. Lately, responsible citizens have had to fill that void, by making judgments based upon what they perceive first hand, see in the media, or read in print and editorials. Responsible citizens are smart enough to look at the facts. Of course, the facts include an overwhelming number of negative reports on Hahn’s administration and a degraded City government.

The elevation of law in Hahn’s administration to a standard of performance is another curious development. Most curious because, law, one would think, should be a rudiment rather than the pinnacle of rational government.