C&RT Decides Not To Set Performance Targets 2019/20

[Alan de Enfield]

Without targets you cannot be criticised for failure to achieve them !

 

 

From Narrowboatworld.

 

 

 

CaRT scraps its targets

Published: Friday, 25 October 2019

FOLLOWING a disastrous 2018/19 year, Canal & River Trust has not set itself targets for its current year.

Allan Richards explains how the Trust measures its success and progress against Key Performance Indicators (KPI) but has now scrapped them after missing almost half its targets.

What are KPI’s?

See: http://allanrichards.net/CaRT/KPITargets2018-19.pdf

For many years CaRT has measured its success by its performance against key indicators. Yearly targets are set by chief executive, Richard Parry, and agreed by the board. Progress towards KPI targets is presented at bi-monthly board meetings. A traffic light system is used such that the board can quickly identify where progress towards target falls short of what is expected:

Green—on track to achieve full year target

Yellow—risk that full year target may not be achieved

Red—unlikely that full year target will be achieved/full year will not be achieved

KPI reports now include how long a KPI has been red or green and the person or document providing the KPI figure. For example, “WEM report” is what most boaters would know as the rolling monthly survey which provides visitor/visit numbers and satisfaction statistics.

For 2018/19, CaRT split its 22 KPI’s into four categories:

♦ Defra Waterway Targets

♦ Waterway measures

♦ Other measures

♦ Financial measures

The ten fails

 Whilst not made clear in CaRT’s last annual report (2018/19), the Trust failed to meet almost half of the 22 targets it set itself. The ten fails, compare to seven the previous year (2017/18) and just three the year before that (2016/17).

Worse still for boaters, in the important “waterway measures” category, CaRT failed to meet five out of six targets. The only target it met was that for non boating visitor satisfaction ...

The target failures

The following is a list of the ten KPI’s where CaRT failed to reach target:

Number of individual visitors to our waterways in typical two-week period (over last 12 months)

Public safety—number of reported incidents due to infrastructure

Combined employee, volunteer and contractor RIDDOR accident frequency rating (accidents per 100,000 hours)

Customer satisfaction rating of boaters

№ of days of unplanned closures to navigation within our control (individual instances over 48 hours)

% of employees engaged as per employee engagement survey result

№ of adoptions of our waterways (each adoption scheme roughly equates to 1 mile)

People aware of the Trust

№ of active Friends attracted and retained, regularly donating

£ million secured from restricted statutory and voluntary funding, philanthropic and individual giving and contributions in kind

I will concentrate on just two of the above believing that these are the most important to boaters.

Visitor numbers

 

 

 

 

CaRT’s claims regarding visitor numbers have received much criticism over the years in narrowboatworld.  CaRT does not help itself by sticking to a single measure and the public is given figures in the millions and hundreds of millions with little or no explanation as to why they are so different or where they come from.

Suffice to say, the figures come from a rolling survey which asks participants if they have visited an inland waterway within the last two weeks (it is suggested that if a longer period is used then people tend to forget). Further questioning determines how many times in the two week period they visited.

Taking the KPI “Number of individual visitors to our waterways in typical two-week period (over last 12 months)”, CaRT say they achieved 4.1 million visitors last year.  This is well down on the target of 4.5million and less than the 4.3 million achieved in 2017/18.

The fact is that, over the last four years, KPI visitor numbers have been in decline. CaRT claimed 4.5 million in 2014/15. Today they give the figure as 4.1 million.

It is even worse with CaRT’s non-KPI figure of the number of visits per year. In 2014/15 the Trust claimed 402 million.  It’s 2018/19 annual report shows this has dropped to 349 million.

The reason why this matters to boaters is to do with future funding which government states it wishes to reduce. Unless CaRT can demonstrate that its waterways are providing greater benefit to the general public (i.e. more visitors = more wellbeing = greater benefit), government has little incentive increase its £50 million per year grant when the agreement ends in March 2027. Indeed, it is likely to be reduced or be removed altogether.

Unplanned closures

 

In 2017/8, CaRT had 490 days lost to unplanned closures missing its target of 400 . For 2018/19 it set itself a target of less than 450 lost days. In the event, it again missed its target suffering 649 lost days.

However, reading the small print, the 2018/19 figures it did not include 265 days lost due to vandalism which the Trust claims caused the Middlewich Branch breach.  (Pictured.)  Likewise it did not include 396 days due to “drought conditions”. These it considered to be outside its control.

Research carried out a year ago indicated that, whilst the number of days lost to unplanned closures has risen year on year, CaRT has changed its “days lost” KPI to exclude certain closures such that it appears that days lost are reducing.

What started out some years back as a simple KPI for the number of days lost to unplanned closures has morphed into “№ of days of unplanned closures to navigation within our control (individual instances over 48 hours)”. That is why CaRT are now so keen to blame vandalism or the weather for its inability to keep its waterways open.

However, with the latest KPI figure, CaRT can no longer keep up this pretence:

No targets for 2019/20

Faced with this declining ability to meet yearly KPI targets, CaRT has has simply scrapped them. Hidden away on page 41 of its latest annual report are some “eight broad measures of success” which will replace the 22 KPI’s.

However, CaRT say these new “measures of success” will have no targets set against them this year.

Obviously, if the Trust does not set itself targets it can not fail to meet them.  Likewise, if it changes how it measures its performance, comparisons can not be made with previous years.

Do you get the feeling that CaRT is just changing the way it measures its success and progress to avoid being held accountable for its deteriorating year-on-year performance?

 

References:

CaRT’s performance against yearly KPI targets are documented in May board minutes (some scrolling will be needed to find them):

2018/19 (see page 11 of 46)

2017/18 (see page 35 of 60)

2016/17 (see page 11 of 44)

(Note: The 2018/19 figures show “Customer satisfaction rating of boaters” as “Outstanding”. The actual figure was later given in the annual report as 61%. This is both a fail against target and down on the previous year.)

 

 

[Momac]

I guess C&RT will soon be gone ?

[Alan de Enfield]

2 minutes ago, MartynG said:

I guess C&RT will soon be gone ?

As of this week I have 'given up and gone' so no longer have a 'dog in the fight'

One boat in Plymouth

One boat in Dinorwic

[Tuscan]

18 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

 

Good management ploy, change the criteria so that you no longer can compare like with like.

[matty40s]

You are all wrong and too negative about their motives. 

This declassification and removal of finicky measures ensures that a continued feeling of wellbeing is enjoyed as the top managers receive their bonuses again without feeling guilty about pesky red boxes on their annual review.

 

Edited October 27, 2019 by matty40s

[Boater Sam]

If there are no performance targets, ergo there can be no bonuses paid for performance.

 

But I will bet that there will be.

 

Anti vandal bonus to be mooted?

[Momac]

13 minutes ago, matty40s said:

nsures that a ontinued feeling of wellbeing i

We are getting all that mental health and wellbeing  stuff on an almost  daily basis where I work.

It's making me feel depressed !

[zenataomm]

This doesn't bode well.

The obvious tack to take when failing KPIs is to tighten them up, not chuck them out of the window.

[Tony Brooks]

5 minutes ago, zenataomm said:

This doesn't bode well.

The obvious tack to take when failing KPIs is to tighten them up, not chuck them out of the window.

 

being of a more practical bent KPI says to me King Pin Incarnation (not that we use king pins much these days but perhaps the top brass like to think of themselves as king pins for the organisation.

 

Hopefully within a ewek or so I will be with Alan and not have a a dog in the fight and CaRTs goings on is one of the reasons I am not longer willing to spend money on canal boating.

[Alan de Enfield]

5 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

Hopefully within a ewek or so I will be with Alan and not have a a dog in the fight

Will you bring the EWEK or shall I provide one ?

[Arthur Marshall]

To be honest about all this, and having suffered target management for years, it must be said that this target stuff is nonsense anyway.  Targets are ALWAYS unrealistic, as they are only set to make the setting management look good.  If they are finally shown as met, it's almost always because someone has massaged the figures to make it seem so. They never, ever, reflect a genuine state of affairs, all they do is waste a vast chunk of everyone's time and energy (and creative processes).  And of course, monitoring targets, achievements and progress costs a small fortune, all of which is wasted money that could be better spent elsewhere.

Anyone who has worked in this kind of firm knows all this, and I imagine everyone at CRT has heaved an enormous sigh of relief that they won't have to spend most of their time filling in forms with fake figures to please their immediate boss any more, but can actually use the time to get on with the job.  So I say, good on them for scrapping them.

And, finally, my argument with my bosses was always that a target is something to aim at.  By it's very nature, sometimes you're going to miss it.  No archer ever hits the bulls eye 100%.

[Kudzucraft]

4 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

To be honest about all this, and having suffered target management for years, it must be said that this target stuff is nonsense anyway.  Targets are ALWAYS unrealistic, as they are only set to make the setting management look good.  If they are finally shown as met, it's almost always because someone has massaged the figures to make it seem so. They never, ever, reflect a genuine state of affairs, all they do is waste a vast chunk of everyone's time and energy (and creative processes).  And of course, monitoring targets, achievements and progress costs a small fortune, all of which is wasted money that could be better spent elsewhere.

Anyone who has worked in this kind of firm knows all this, and I imagine everyone at CRT has heaved an enormous sigh of relief that they won't have to spend most of their time filling in forms with fake figures to please their immediate boss any more, but can actually use the time to get on with the job.  So I say, good on them for scrapping them.

And, finally, my argument with my bosses was always that a target is something to aim at.  By it's very nature, sometimes you're going to miss it.  No archer ever hits the bulls eye 100%.

AMEN!!

[BruceinSanity]

1 hour ago, Arthur Marshall said:

To be honest about all this, and having suffered target management for years, it must be said that this target stuff is nonsense anyway.  Targets are ALWAYS unrealistic, as they are only set to make the setting management look good.  If they are finally shown as met, it's almost always because someone has massaged the figures to make it seem so. They never, ever, reflect a genuine state of affairs, all they do is waste a vast chunk of everyone's time and energy (and creative processes).  And of course, monitoring targets, achievements and progress costs a small fortune, all of which is wasted money that could be better spent elsewhere.

Anyone who has worked in this kind of firm knows all this, and I imagine everyone at CRT has heaved an enormous sigh of relief that they won't have to spend most of their time filling in forms with fake figures to please their immediate boss any more, but can actually use the time to get on with the job.  So I say, good on them for scrapping them.

And, finally, my argument with my bosses was always that a target is something to aim at.  By it's very nature, sometimes you're going to miss it.  No archer ever hits the bulls eye 100%.

Hear, hear. One of the reasons I gave up working in the NHS was being given targets that required me to a ) make full use of the budget, b ) minimise staff turn over and c ) achieve a 5% cost saving (in a department where 75% of the budget was staff salaries for staff on an incremental pay scheme).

[MartinC]

Regretfully this could be a shot in the foot.

 

CaRT relies on government grant to balance the books. Governments like KPIs.

[mrsmelly]

Well I am staying ont CART run system. After all there is no choice if you love cruising the inland system. The system is without doubt in better condition than when I first moved aboard despite CART lol. Still GVFM. All forms of business are run badly nowadays, I read somehwhere that some police forces now give an opt out to police during training if they dont like foul language or aggression!! Ok I dont know where I read it but twas online so it could be true, in line with some universities apparently 

[pete.i]

Thing is, C&RT are all we've got. All this whinging and whining, (and I admit that I do my fair share although not on this forum because posters here just just jump down one's throat rather than putting forward  a coherent counter argument,) is all very good but if The Canal and River Trust go down the pan then so do the canals eventually. I do not have a boat of my own any more as such so it really doesn't matter to me but I still wouldn't like to see the inland waterways spiral into terminal decline. I know the government have some form of option to take back control if CRT fail but in all honesty I cannot see any government keeping the canals going.

 

I do not know how or if it can be done but the only people who have a vested interest in saving the canal system are boaters and from where I am sitting it seems to me that all the boating organisations and indeed boaters themselves only want to do CRT and each other down. As I have said I no longer pay a licence fee to CRT so it isn't going to affect my life if the canals disappear. But there are a lot of people on the canals who's lives will be severely affected if such a thing should happen.

 

And for those who will think that I am a licence fee dodger, I am not. I have a part share in a boat with a friend of mine. That friend pays for a licence and mooring and every thing else. I have put a small amount of money in to the boat but I also look after it for my friend and I get to use it. 

[Harpur Hill]

2 hours ago, BruceinSanity said:

Hear, hear. One of the reasons I gave up working in the NHS was being given targets that required me to a ) make full use of the budget, b ) minimise staff turn over and c ) achieve a 5% cost saving (in a department where 75% of the budget was staff salaries for staff on an incremental pay scheme).

I too used work for the NHS. At one point I became responsible, amongst other things, for a revenue budget of £73M, at my annual review I had under-spent by £8K. I was very pleased. My boss gave me a hard time saying I should have overspent to help the case for a larger budget next year. To no avail did I argue that I did not need a bigger budget. After being told I was being reorganised (along with several others) for the fourth time in five years I retired. I was then asked if I would come back for three days per week. No chance.

 

HH

[Alan de Enfield]

1 hour ago, pete.i said:

I know the government have some form of option to take back control if CRT fail but in all honesty I cannot see any government keeping the canals going.

The Government actually retained the right to give the 'waterways' to another charity if they believe that C&RT are incapable - they did not reserve the right to take it back under state control.

 

 

[PaulD]

8 hours ago, MartynG said:

I guess C&RT will soon be gone ?

When the Toddbrook report comes out?

[Heartland]

If CRT is to be replaced who is to replace them?

 

Loosing dedicated staff has not helped though. 

 

Can there be a panacea for this problem?

[cuthound]

5 hours ago, BruceinSanity said:

Hear, hear. One of the reasons I gave up working in the NHS was being given targets that required me to a ) make full use of the budget, b ) minimise staff turn over and c ) achieve a 5% cost saving (in a department where 75% of the budget was staff salaries for staff on an incremental pay scheme).

 

Completely agree. The main reason for me leaving BT was having to try to meet targets thst quickly became impossible, I.e. 15% year on year cut to my overall budget for staff, office space and vehicles. I got out when I felt my group was about to implode.

[Allan(nb Albert)]

Just now, Heartland said:

If CRT is to be replaced who is to replace them?

 

Loosing dedicated staff has not helped though. 

 

Can there be a panacea for this problem?

I  don't see CRT being replaced because it suits the paymaster, Defra, to accept that they are performing within the requirements of the grant agreement for the time being. If they fail against those measures, then Defra are able to cut grant. I suspect they would prefer that option in the short term rather than replacing CRT and/or its senior management.

 

Longer term CRT might be given to EA with government grabbing the non operational property ...

 

 

[Tuscan]

14 minutes ago, Allan(nb Albert) said:

 

 

Longer term CRT might be given to EA with government grabbing the non operational property ...

 

 

Or perhaps the reverse where the EA navigations are given to CRT in return for the dowry being renewed/increased. 

[Allan(nb Albert)]

12 minutes ago, Tuscan said:

Or perhaps the reverse where the EA navigations are given to CRT in return for the dowry being renewed/increased. 

That is , of course, the other possibility.

[Arthur Marshall]

I think the actual situation is that a very old system is coming to the end of its useful life (bit like my boat and, possibly, me). It cost a lot of money to set up a couple of centuries back and would cost probably the equivalent now to keep it running, and the money simply isn't there. Not when schools and hospitals are crumbling and the only solution the government sees is to flog everything it can to the Chinese. If there's no profit in it, it won't be done. 

Targets are pointless if all they do is highlight failure and it becomes impossible to fake it. I suspect the London canals will be kept going and the rest slowly reduced to leisure use for walking and fishermen.