WOW, is that not a sweet sounding buzzword?

I hear it months ago at a day put on by Mission to highlight some programs that had been created to address aspects of homelessness. Most of the programs/initiatives were aimed at youth, however Raven’s Moon was included in those speaking of what they were doing.

Success Matrix. Hearing that phrase a powerful success matrix for me would have been having a device that fired cream pies so  could have pied the one who utter that banal and blighted phrase.

After 25 years as a Chartered Accountant, executive and person of business I am a strong  believer in quality control, whether in terms of the product produced, the service provided or the goals being pursued.

However I have seen, time after time after time, the negative consequences and costs incurred when what was being used as the yardstick to measure the results was not a well thought out choice.

Consider GM . For more than a decade the basis for setting the bonuses of GM executives [I am assuming that those setting the bonuses thought the results rewarded with bonuses were beneficial to GM] while beneficial to stock price were detrimental to GM’s long term survival.

The bonus structure at GM rewarded executives with extravagant bonuses for actions that would run GM into bankruptcy.

A government loan was required to allow GM to survive. GM came roaring back by using the protection of bankruptcy to make the changes and reorganization that should have been made, but were not because those actions would have significantly reduced executive bonuses.

The point is that you had better be very careful how you define success, how you measure success and exactly what that measurement is really saying you are achieving.

The ‘success of BC’s shelter programs is a perfect example of interpreting what the numbers say through lenses distorted by what you want the numbers to be saying and ignoring everything – and everyone – that suggests anything different or that you do not want to hear.

That BC shelters place slightly over 50% of the people coming to the shelters in housing or treatment Sounds wonderful’

Until you ask the simple question: if 50+% of those coming to shelters are placed in housing or treatment this year and 50+% of those who came to shelters last year were placed in housing or treatment……. Well, 50+% + 50+% = 100+% so unless homeless are pouring onto the streets shouldn’t there be few- if any – homeless on the streets?

In fact, an analysis of the numbers in Maple Ridge when the mayor and council of Maple Ridge demanded someone other than the Salvation Army be given the shelter contract because the presence of a homeless population in Maple Ridge was proof the Salvation Army was not running the shelter correctly, would leave one wondering how the mayor and council of Maple Ridge could possibly be upset about having a negative number of homeless on the streets of Maple Ridge? 

In reality the number of people placed in housing or in treatment by BC shelters has nothing to do with addressing or reducing homeless numbers. The year over year increase in the number of homeless on the streets of BC makes it extremely clear that whatever the number of people placed in housing or treatment measures or reflects – it is not addressing or reducing homelessness.

What the number of people placed in housing or referred to treatment measure, reflect is the health and efficiency of BC’s homeless recycling system and programs.

From being homeless to being in the shelter/outreach programs to being in housing/treatment to being homeless; homeless/services/housing/homeless; an endless cycle of recycling. It is how you house [send to treatment] 50% percent of the homeless while the number of homeless on the streets rise every year.

Quality control, efficiency and effectiveness, achieving what you wish to achieve require having a clear understanding of what your goal is and what that outcome in fact looks looks like, Then you can determine what you can measure to assess whether your actions are achieving what the goal[s] is.

IF you do not understand and choose carefully you end up measuring [rewarding] and promoting behaviours that are undesirable be it running GM into bankruptcy or enabling and promoting the growth of the number of homeless on BC’s streets.

End Part I, Part II Measuring and promoting a negative outcome