Anatomy of Performance (“AOP”) is a framework for performance improvement that uses needs assessment methods to understand and address the variables that influence organizational performance. AOP was codified as a process in 1990, with the publication of Improving Performance: How to Manage the White Space on the Organization Chart by Geary Rummler and Alan Brache. This framework emerged from decades of work by the authors in the Performance Improvement field and the Programmed Instruction movement of the 1960s (West, 2016, p. 41). A system approach to needs assessment, with an overall goal of aligning results and processes in complex environments, its name “Anatomy of Performance” was derived from an analogy to human anatomy. AOP’s approach
…show more content…
88). Similar to the Macro level of the OEM, this level examines organizational outputs, in a way that is holistic and systemic. In addition to reviewing performance gaps at this level, the AOP employs a diagnostic tool called the Relationship Map, which views the organizational structure based on function, and is used to determine whether there is a disconnect that may be impacting performance (Wimbiscus, 1993, p. 313). This analysis is intended to highlight flaws in the organizational structure that may be hindering performance of effective people, because according to Rummler and Brache “if you pit a good performer against a bad system, the system will win almost every time” (2012, p. 62). Another goal of the analysis at the organization level is to identify conditions leading to suboptimization, when a change in one area may negatively impact operations in …show more content…
In OEM, the term stakeholders identifies all persons who may be involved in the needs assessment process at all levels, and a representation of stakeholders form the core work group (Kaufman & Guerra-López, 2013, p. 10). In AOP, stakeholders are defined differently, and are those who would be affected by the changes identified through application of the AOP framework, but they only play an advisory role in any process improvement project (Rummler & Brache, 2012, p. 137). This was not an issue addressed in any of the other literature reviewed for this report; however, this delineation between stakeholders and work group members in the AOP framework may result in those affected feeling marginalized through the imposition of a solution without being part of its
88). Similar to the Macro level of the OEM, this level examines organizational outputs, in a way that is holistic and systemic. In addition to reviewing performance gaps at this level, the AOP employs a diagnostic tool called the Relationship Map, which views the organizational structure based on function, and is used to determine whether there is a disconnect that may be impacting performance (Wimbiscus, 1993, p. 313). This analysis is intended to highlight flaws in the organizational structure that may be hindering performance of effective people, because according to Rummler and Brache “if you pit a good performer against a bad system, the system will win almost every time” (2012, p. 62). Another goal of the analysis at the organization level is to identify conditions leading to suboptimization, when a change in one area may negatively impact operations in …show more content…
In OEM, the term stakeholders identifies all persons who may be involved in the needs assessment process at all levels, and a representation of stakeholders form the core work group (Kaufman & Guerra-López, 2013, p. 10). In AOP, stakeholders are defined differently, and are those who would be affected by the changes identified through application of the AOP framework, but they only play an advisory role in any process improvement project (Rummler & Brache, 2012, p. 137). This was not an issue addressed in any of the other literature reviewed for this report; however, this delineation between stakeholders and work group members in the AOP framework may result in those affected feeling marginalized through the imposition of a solution without being part of its