The presentation was designed to be viewed in full-screen and some of the sound and image quality was lost when the clip was compressed and uploaded. Please accept my apologies for any inconvenience caused by the loss of quality.
Regards,
Jarrod.

If you have any comments, observations or queries, please feel free to add a comment to this page and I will gladly respond.
Thanks,
Jarrod.

Hi Jarrod,

Your report is interesting to read and offers many creative insights. A video provides a good introduction (do not worry about compression, I was able to understand everything). My comments below are primarily related to your pdf report.

It appears that you have modified the task somewhat. Most of the submissions I have read tried to formulate 7 indicators for 4 performance areas given by MSFA. That way some of the areas ended up with more than one KPI. You decided to add 3 new performance areas and produced one or more KPIs for each. I feel that the task was not supposed to be open-ended in this regard.

You laid a solid theoretical foundation and successfully adapted a balanced scorecard approach to MSFA’s circumstances. Your performance model looks convincing and logical with the only exception of Awareness. MSF’s objective is two-fold: saving lives themselves (directly) and saving lives by mobilising the international community (indirectly). Obviously, MSF cannot control tangible results of awareness raising. Therefore, it seems to me that Awareness should be a ‘twin’ of Lives Saved in the centre of your model.

Health of the Workforce – you are giving a laundry list of KPIs. Which one of them best addresses the quality of staff recruited? Number of attendees at recruitment events is a lead indicator and not a KPI, in my opinion.

Exposure analysis for the Awareness area – do you mind giving an approximate formula for calculating this indicator? We have toyed with a very similar idea ourselves and could not develop a ratio that made sense numerically. Just curious how you would go about it in practice.

Outputs, Outcomes and Lives Saved – I think you are not taking into account that MSFA is not a full-fledged operational section. Based on the 2006 report their major operating responsibility is the Project Unit in Sydney. That is why I am confused about the basis of measurement for these 3 areas. Given a particular country/project of operations, if MSFA contributes a certain percentage of total project budget and a certain number of volunteers how do you propose to measure MSFA’s outputs and outcomes? Are they going to be prorated somehow?

Overall, your report is comprehensive and well presented.

Hi Jarrod,

I really like the idea of you using the video as a way to give an overview of your report.
Also good work on the framework illustration, using a target- that was a really good way to represent the importance and relationship between KPIs.
Although what I found it interesting that you used surveys as a lot of times as your base management. Our team thought about that too, but we thought that it wouldn't be very cost effective for a non-profit organisation such as MSFA.
Other than that, great work!
Alicia

Thank-you for your comments, Alicia.

The target model for a performance management framework seemed a logical way to present the relationship between key performance areas, and I'm glad you agree.

The constraint of cost-effectiveness is something I also considered in my report, so your point about the surveys is a highly relevant one. Surveys are a great tool for obtaining a combination of qualitative and quantitative feedback, so naturally I was looking for ways for MSFA get the benefit of surveys without incurring a large cost in implementing them.

As I noted in my report, one such way of doing this is by incorporating them into fundraising activities. Having worked in a call centre in the past (not my most glorious working days), I am aware that telemarketers, for example, often ask their subjects a number of set questions 'market-research' type questions even in the course of a sale. An approach I have recommended is to incorporate these types of questions (for example, about MSFA Awareness) into interview questions in the course of MSFA's face-to-face and phone-based fundraising efforts.

This would minimize the cost to MSFA while still providing the benefits of qualitative and quantitative survey findings.

Hopefully this will also help to address a couple of Olga's well-considered remarks (above).

Cheers,

Jarrod.

Hi Jarrod:

Great Work!

We find the performance management framework overview target model really interesting . It gives us a basic idea of where your KPIs come from. We find it is very easy to understand the KPIs once you put it into a circle and explain how each KPI is moving towards the central goal.

We really like how you highlighted the importance of efficient and effective allocation of scarce resources for a humanitarian-aid organisation(MSF Australia). The ratios are easy to apply to MSF Australia.

Overall, it is really good

Well done :)

Andrea & Katy

Andrea and Katy,
Thank-you for your kind words. This student challenge is a great opportunity for us to share ideas and recognise each other's achievements. I wish you both all the best with your excellent entry.
Cheers,
Jarrod.

Hi Jarrod,

I thought your report was very well laid out and the target idea was very innovative.
I have to agree with Olga though that your approach was very broad. Would you say that you came up with 7 KPIs or 7 areas in which KPIs could be applied?

Yes, using the target model for marketing purposes is a very attractive prospect.

One of the great things about the target model is that it presents a clear, interesting and comprehensive overview of Médecins Sans Frontières Australia's performance results in a way that is engaging and easy to interpret. For these reasons, I believe the target model would be ideally suited to marketing purposes at MSFA.

At a glance, it shows potential donors that MSFA is committed to maintaining its Independence and Ethics, and most importantly, committed to using its resources in the best possible way to achieve real outcomes and save lives.

Understanding MSFA's critical commitments will encourage donations and help build awareness in the community.

Hi Eleanor,

Thank-you for taking the time to review my submission.

In approaching the problem, my key objective was to produce a solution that had practical value for people inside and outside the organisation; something that would be meaningful not only to internal MSFA personnel, but particularly to people in the broader community who might be considering donating funds to an organisation like MSFA.

In this context, it seemed appropriate to identify key areas of performance for MSFA that an everyday person could relate to; concepts like ethics, cost effectiveness and saving lives.

As you can see, I have supported each of these broad areas with relevant bases of measurement, which are generally specific, reliable and practical to measure.

For an organisation like MSFA, performance measurement is not just about checking boxes on a scorecard. It's about identifying weaknesses, celebrating achievements, and it's an opportunity to communicate those successes to the broader community.

I believe my performance framework builds a solid platform for achieving these diverse aims.

Hiya Jarrod!

I thought MSFs 'spirit of independence and ethics' was cleverly described as a halo effect in your accessible KPI model, featured in Strategic Performance Solution's video synopsis.

Also, I thought it appealingly different to use a visual representation in order to reinforce KPIs...good work!:) However, such a creative medium has much potential for originality, in which I found your video somewhat lacking. But this, perhaps, is besides the point, given the inviting confidence, which infuses your excellent presentation skills:) Good luck!

Hi Jarrod

Well done on a thorough and easy to read report.

I have a question regarding the practicality of measuring outcomes. Who would be responsible for assessing lives improved/preserved - MSFA or international branches who coordinate fieldwork? I understand that the volunteer medical professionals will be able to report their opinion ('professional judgement') to some extent but I think that measuring the life preserving outcome from the measures you listed would required extensive follow up of patients. This is something that would be very difficult to implement, especially in a crisis situation where there are so many threats to life.

Good Luck!

Thanks for your comments Renae.

I agree with the sentiment that the concept of "lives saved" is indeed a difficult one to measure. To an extent, the figure relating to the efforts of MSFA would have to be derived - and is complicated by the fact that the majority of MSFA's work is administrative, and the majority of the actual fieldwork is undertaken by other MSF international bodies.

So to answer your first question, the international branches that coordinate fieldwork would be primarily responsible for deriving an approximate figure for "lives saved" based on the professional judgement of medical professionals as well as records of the specific surgeries and procedures undertaken. This would then be pro-rated based on MSFA's contributions to the overall operation.(relative to the overall MSF international effort, and taking into account financial, administrative, and personnel contributions).

As you noted, there are constraints or limitations to this model, mainly in terms of the complexity of the measurement process and issues of subjectivity and reliability.

On the whole, however, the concept of 'lives saved' is an extremely important element of performance for an international aid organisation like MSF, and even an approximation will aid performance measurement significantly.

Whilst I agree live saved is extremely important, do you believe that its is realistically measurable for use as a KPI?