A little over thirty years ago, I entered the world of management by objectives with colleagues much more experienced than I in these “techniques”/“technologies”/management tools.
Management by objectives then became a modern option for the management of all organizations in Cuba.
During those years, its use expanded; almost all businesspeople and leaders of virtually all institutions were trained, from the most strategic and decisive enterprises for the country to the simplest of all entities.
Managing under the philosophy of management by objectives became the prevailing trend, almost a fad; later, it became the norm.
A group was created within the Ministry of Higher Education to address this issue, along with a group of professors tasked with assisting and evaluating the quality of the process and objectives in each of our ministries.
After institutionalization came bureaucratization; then, popularization.
In this way, Management by Objectives (MBO) began to disintegrate in our hands, losing the virtues recognized in the texts that addressed management problems.
An unknown program
The 10th Plenary Session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba brought us the news that the Government Program to correct distortions and relaunch the economy — which we are unaware of even though it was approved more than a year ago — has ten general objectives, which I list below:
- Advance the implementation of the Macroeconomic Stabilization Program.
- Increase and diversify the country’s external income.
- Increase national production, with emphasis on food.
- Advance the resizing and development of the socialist state enterprise and the other economic actors in their complementary role.
- Advance the improvement of strategic management for territorial development.
- Advance the improvement of government management.
- Consolidate and develop social policies, guaranteeing protection for individuals, families, households and communities in vulnerable situations.
- Advance the implementation of general directives aimed at preventing and reducing crime, corruption, illegality and social indiscipline.
- Implement the government program to recover the National Electric Power System (SEN).
- Manage science and innovation, social communication and digital transformation to boost development spheres and improve government management.
I hope, I imagine, I suppose…
It’s very good to have a program. I assume this is the result of a consensus reached among a group of officials, that it has been discussed in the relevant bodies of the Party — the Central Committee, the Political Bureau — and the National Assembly, especially its Economic Affairs Committee, as well as in the Council of Ministers.
I imagine the discussions in each of these bodies have been tremendous, not only because of the complexity of a program of this type under any circumstances, but also because of the difficult situation in our country, where it must be implemented.
A commendable result would be a program that can identify the “main directions,” establish the appropriate sequence, and provide the necessary consistency and coherence between the various components to ensure a minimum guarantee of success.
Why isn’t it made public?
What I ask myself again is, if it already exists, if it is the product of a consensus among the country’s highest leadership bodies, why isn’t it made public?
Isn’t it the people who, in addition to carrying it forward, will have to face/endure/suffer its consequences?
Well, we don’t know the program, but we have what are called general objectives, mentioned above.
I remember that Dr. C. Alexis Codina, who was first my dean and later my colleague, professor at the Faculty of Economics and first director of the Center for Management Techniques Studies at the University of Havana, emphasized two basic principles of management by objectives in one of his articles, “Rescatando la dirección por objetivos (DPO). En un nuevo contexto” (Rescuing management by objectives (MBO). In a new context).
The first is that MBO focuses on results, previously defined in terms of objectives; the second is that people feel more motivated and committed when they know in advance what is expected of them, in terms of results, than when it is presented in ambiguous terms.
Measuring compliance
I think these ten general objectives are stated in terms of results and, therefore, I assume those results are measurable.
Otherwise, their compliance cannot be objectively assessed.
I imagine that the Plenary Session was able to discuss the desired results, the indicators that will allow progress to be measured, the goals to be achieved and the timeframes within which those goals will be achieved, as well as the balance of benefits and costs of achieving them.
In other words, objectives, whether general or not, need to be specified in indicators, in goals to be achieved within specific timeframes.
The Plenary Session information that was made public does not include those indicators, goals, and timeframes for each objective, but I imagine that those attending the Plenary Session were informed in detail about them.
If not, how can we agree with them?
The deputies too
Likewise, I hope that the deputies attending the first session of the National Assembly of People’s Power this year, to be held in a few days, already have this document in their possession, so that they can study it in depth and contribute their opinions to improve it.
I return to the article by my colleague and professor Alexis Codina, who, summarizing the ideas of another classic in management by objectives, states:
- You can’t make detailed and valid plans for your program or strategy until you know exactly where you want to go.
- The clearer your idea of what you’re trying to achieve, the greater your chances of success.
- What’s important isn’t what you do, but the results you achieve.
- Don’t tell someone what to do; tell them what is expected of them.
- It’s not possible to assess results if they aren’t compared to previously established objectives.
- Ultimately, an objective is nothing more than an anticipation of a desired outcome.
One of the most common and most repeated mistakes when it comes to managing/formulating/designing a system of objectives is the lack of comprehensiveness they often suffer from.
It’s about thinking that it’s a simple sum of actions and not a truly living system. I hope this is another of those aspects examined in the Plenary Session and to be examined in the next session of the National Assembly.
I don’t think it’s necessary to repeat that we are at a critical juncture, in which the best weapon against us is the weakness of our economy and its impact on material life and social conscience; that the greatest aspiration of our people is to have within their reach the essentials for a decent life.
This government program is undoubtedly needed, but it is even more necessary to make it known, to provide spaces for its criticism, so that popular participation ceases to be a slogan and becomes a reality.
