- Define the scope of the analysis.
- Review and document the current state or results and determine what is missing, what falls short of potential, etc.
- Describe and document the desired state or results.
- Compare the current state or results and desired state or results, and document the differences. This is the gap.
- Determine and document the steps to be taken to close each gap.
What ought we measure?
The relevant matters to take into account in considering the quality of management exercised centre around key performance tests about your state of knowledge and its application. In particular, these tests are about:
Assessing risk severity:
• To what extent can and ought you reasonably be able to foresee the extent of harm likely to be caused.
• How do you ensure that you exercise “sound” judgment around likelihood and consequence?
Maximizing intervention opportunities:
• To what extent can and ought you have control over the things which give rise to the harm likely to be caused.
• How do you consider the practical measures which can be taken to prevent, control, abate or mitigate the harm; how do you ensure that you exercise “sound” judgement around “cost effective”, “available”, “capacity building” options?
How ought we measure?
The two examples (of the one tool) below demonstrate three structured levels of information. First, the identification of the key elements which must be reviewed. Second, the necessary, and sufficient, sub-elements underpinning the key elements. Third, the criteria which needs to be explored for evidence of sound performance.
Evidence provides profiling against indicators
The tool then displays the summary scores in a single graphic.
Presenting “one page” snapshots for both assurance and improvement.