Managing for Results Training Course

Participants can establish measurable objectives and indicators that direct effort toward required results.

• Outcome statements built from strategic priorities, service standards and customer needs
• SMART objectives tested for specificity, evidence, ownership, deadlines and relevance
• Leading and lagging indicators selected without encouraging counterproductive behaviour
• Balanced Scorecard perspectives linked to team-level performance measures
• Targets calibrated using baselines, capacity limits, risk tolerance and demand
• Performance dashboards distinguish measures, milestones, tolerances and escalation triggers
• Alignment conversations connect individual objectives with departmental operating plans

Participants can produce operational plans that organise work, resources, dependencies and delivery risks.

• Operational plans structured around outcomes, actions, owners, resources and dates
• Work breakdown structures convert annual commitments into manageable deliverables
• Critical-path analysis identifies dependencies, bottlenecks and schedule contingency requirements
• Capacity planning compares demand forecasts, available hours and capability gaps
• Risk registers record causes, impacts, controls, owners and review dates
• RAID logs separate risks, assumptions, issues and dependencies for control
• Contingency actions set decision thresholds before service performance deteriorates

Participants can make and escalate decisions using evidence, explicit criteria and documented accountability.

• Decision rights clarified using RAPID for recurring cross-functional decisions
• Evidence quality tested for source reliability, bias, timeliness and relevance
• Root-cause analysis uses five whys and fishbone diagrams
• Options appraised through weighted criteria, cost, risk and implementation feasibility
• Escalation briefs state recommendation, rationale, consequences and required decision
• Pre-mortem reviews expose assumptions before committing resources or public promises
• Decision logs preserve accountability, learning and follow-through commitments

Participants can delegate work with appropriate authority, support, control points and follow-through.

• Delegation diagnosis separates retain, share, delegate and develop decisions
• Task briefs specify outcome, authority, constraints, resources, checkpoints and standards
• Situational Leadership adjusts direction and support to capability and commitment
• Control points match task risk, employee experience and consequence severity
• Coaching questions use the GROW model to build ownership
• Feedback distinguishes observed behaviour, impact, requested change and agreement
• Accountability reviews address missed commitments without taking work back

Participants can communicate priorities, decisions and delivery issues to gain timely stakeholder action.

• Stakeholder maps identify interest, influence, information needs and engagement approach
• Communication plans specify audiences, messages, channels, timing and ownership
• Briefings frame results, priorities, constraints, decisions and next actions
• Active listening tests meaning before responding to concerns or resistance
• Structured meetings use agendas, timeboxes, decisions, actions and minutes
• Constructive challenge separates facts, interpretations, interests and proposed solutions
• Written updates use concise status, exceptions, risks and requests

Participants can address performance gaps through clear expectations, coaching, feedback and formal improvement actions.

• Performance agreements define expected results, behaviours, evidence and review cadence
• One-to-one meetings combine progress review, coaching, support and accountability
• Performance gaps diagnosed through skill, will, resource and process causes
• Behavioural feedback uses Situation-Behavior-Impact and agreed next steps
• Difficult conversations prepare facts, impact, questions, boundaries and follow-up
• Recognition links specific contribution to customer, team or organisational results
• Performance improvement plans set measures, support, dates and consequences

Participants can establish team conditions that support coordinated work, constructive challenge and reliable handoffs.

• Team charters establish purpose, roles, decision rules and working norms
• Psychological safety encourages reporting, challenge, learning and early escalation
• Motivation diagnoses apply autonomy, mastery, purpose and equity considerations
• Conflict resolution separates positions, interests, options and agreed actions
• Cross-functional handoffs define inputs, acceptance criteria, timing and ownership
• Team routines use visual management, daily huddles and exception review
• Remote and hybrid coordination sets availability, channels and response expectations

Participants can manage the people and control requirements of change without losing focus on current delivery.

• Change impact assessments identify affected roles, processes, systems and behaviours
• ADKAR diagnoses awareness, desire, knowledge, ability and reinforcement needs
• Resistance conversations surface loss, uncertainty, workload and trust concerns
• Implementation plans sequence sponsors, communications, training, pilots and reinforcement
• Benefits realisation tracks expected outcomes, adoption evidence and disbenefits
• Lessons learned distinguish corrective actions from repeatable management practices
• Change controls assess scope, cost, schedule, risk and approval consequences

Participants can run structured reviews that convert performance evidence into corrective action and sustained improvement.

• Monthly performance reviews compare actual results with targets, forecasts and tolerances
• Variance analysis separates volume, price, mix, timing and productivity causes
• Corrective action plans assign owners, deadlines, measures and escalation points
• After-action reviews capture intended results, actual results, causes and improvements
• Management reports present exceptions, decisions required, risks and commitments
• Personal application plans prioritise two workplace results and stakeholder actions
• Peer accountability arrangements set review dates, evidence and challenge questions