Time and motion studies have thankfully gone the way of other outmoded management practices, since they were based upon a profound lack of trust in people, and were used as a very blunt instrument by managers who simply wanted to exercise ever greater control over their ‘human resources’. And yet how are we to improve things if we don’t measure efficiency? How are we to know that everything is as it should be if we don’t check up on people? The mantra ‘I trusted my people to do the job right’ is not going to save any manager from the chop in the face of catastrophic failure.

One of my very first bosses had a mantra “in management, you never get what you expect, you only get what you inspect”, and while part of me wishes this was not true, I have to say, even as a natural and inveterate truster of people, that I have had occasion to rue the day I didn’t heed his words. And so I set out to establish processes that both trusted people and checked on them. The key lies in the word ‘performance’. Checking up on people in their job performance, through spot checks or audits or simply by making them show you the evidence of their process or Results, can of course make people feel like they are not trusted, leading in turn to a workforce who refuse to take risks and do the right thing unless specifically authorized or instructed by a manager. People’s experience of being checked up on is negative – maybe they have been criticized in the past and maybe their bosses have used the process to beat them up.

And yet the experience of giving a performance in front of an audience is craved by many – and why wouldn’t you want people to see you if you are a great performer? What is there to fear? Lack of preparation and professionalism on your part? If so then be afraid, be very afraid. But if you’ve put the work in, then bring on the audience. Of course it will be nerve racking. Of course we Brits in particular are not ones to show off. But performance builds confidence. A great performer loves a supportive audience, its only the caustic and crabby critics that they hate. How did we turn ourselves from outrageous show offs at the age of 7, shouting ‘look at me, Mum, look at me’ to the fearful and suspicious adults we are now? So how do we create a ‘performance’ culture whereby employees actively want to be checked on? The key is the motivation behind the checking on the part of the manager. Of course there is an element of ‘making sure’ – of giving ourselves reassurance as managers, particularly if our *** is on the line if things go wrong. But if as a manager your greater purpose in checking up on people is genuinely to raise their standards and assist their personal growth, then check-on.

As Chair of a public institution a few years back, I was informed that, horror of horrors and disaster of disasters, we were to be subject to audit by Government Inspectors. When I expressed pleasure that we were to be audited, I was accused of naivety and offered a £50000 budget from the group parent company to make sure we ‘got through’ the audit with an acceptable rating. I declined. You see I was proud of what we were doing and believed that the Inspectors actually did their job to make things better. Naivety in the extreme clearly! The Inspectors duly came and saw us as we were. They were impressed, and their recommendations were genuinely helpful. All in all a positive process. Far more positive that wasting £50000 on fooling the auditors and obtaining a correspondingly useless report.

As a consultant I have often recommended ‘mystery shopping’ (the use of people pretending to be prospective customers in retail outlets to check the quality of the customer experience) and have seen the very worst and best examples. In the worst examples, retail staff are genuinely afraid of being ‘mystery shopped’ and spend their time trying to ‘suss out’ a mystery shopper in advance in order to score the highest rating, and thus survive. Very helpful. In the best examples, retail staff can’t wait to be mystery shopped so that their bosses can actually see just how good they are. The difference – the motivation behind the schemes and the way they are organized.  If people are fearful they will find ways round schemes. If they welcome it they will be proud to show you their performance.

A performance culture is not always comfortable, but watch how much it means for people on the Saturday night reality shows whether singing, ballroom dancing or ice skating, and see the quite phenomenal growth they accomplish in their technical and artistic performances. They are under the closest scrutiny, and feel fear as a palpable and physically ever present companion from their ‘judges’.  And yet they stand there and weep at the end of their performances – the experience has meant so much to them. What is the point in getting good at anything if there is no one to watch? What is the point in stretching ourselves to grow and learn, if no one is going to encourage us in our struggle? If you call it ‘checking up on people’ then it will surely fail. But if you are genuinely motivated to coach people and be a catalyst in their growth, then you are on a magically emotional journey.