Variations of the Red-Amber-Green "RAG" performance rating system are used extensively.
A common version is really a two rating (Red-Green) system i.e. where all performance is marked as either pass or fail. When over-used on a table of numbers (not least with the common practice of colouring whole cells), this can produce a confusing and garish grid.
A proper three-grade RAG system, including the central Amber, allows more sophisticated ratings to be made. But the Amber rating can be used in two very different ways:
- Fail but only just
- Pass but close to fail
Either way, including Amber in the pattern of fully coloured cells just adds further to the over-whelming blast of colour that assaults the reader's brain.
So why, so often, do we end up with these types of reports and dashboards?
The whole cell colour aspect is probably mainly down to ease of production. It is much easier to produce this in say, Excel, than to use less over-whelming devices.
The extensive use of Green is more curious. It probably indicates a service area where performance has regularly been below target and the people concerned are feeling a bit battered. Lots of Red is demoralising so every opportunity is taken to proclaim the Green. The same motivation will probably lead to adopting the Amber "fail but only just" option. It removes more Red and it gives a feeling of "nearly there".
But before jumping into producing another one of these grids, the analyst should consider what the report or dashboard is actually trying to communicate. In the end, the main purpose has to be to highlight to managers when they need to make a decision or initiate action.
This being so, what is the purpose of the Green? There are lots of months where the target was achieved. So what? What action will we take? Apart, possibly, from a momentary congratulation - none. The Green is where we want to be. Colouring it in may give a sense of assurance, but it does not trigger any management action.
The Red rating is more obvious: we have not achieved the target and we need to do something.
What about Amber? A "fail but only just" statement is still a fail. We still need to do something. What we really need to know is where we met the target (Green) but only just. This is a situation where things may deteriorate and become Red. We may need to take action soon, or be pro-active and take action now, so we need to highlight this.
These considerations suggest that what would be best is a "RA" rating i.e. Red (fail) and Amber (pass but only just) system. Leave everything else un-highlighted on the grounds that there is no need to draw attention to it.
An example could look something like
where Red indicates that we missed the target and Amber indicates that we achieved the target but it was so close to the borderline that we may need to act, or at least keep a close eye on it.
This type of Red-Amber rating system can be developed further to make the Amber look more like a faint Red i.e to use a monochrome (Red-red) system in which tone conveys the meaning. Using this approach, together with some further adjustments to contrast, gives the following alternative:
This illustration uses exactly the same data as the grid above but is set out in a very different way. The idea is to adjust the contrast so that important information stands out and less important information melts into the background.
Attention is drawn to the latest position rather than to the history of previous results. Indicator 4, which missed the target is clearly highlighted by the Red marker. Two other indicators (5 and 7), which only just hit the target, are also highlighted, but in a lighter tone.
The compact visual summary of the last six results then provides additional detail. Indicator 5 has generally been ok so there is probably no need to over-react. Indicator 7 has a history of missing the target. We should continue to monitor it closely.
In conclusion, for dashboards and reports, it may often make sense to abandon the customary RAG systems in favour of a Red-Amber (RA) or Red-red (Rr) as described here.
Finally, another practical reason to abandon the RAG is to help the 10% of males, and 1% of females, who are colour blind.
References
3 Problems With Traditional KPI Traffic Lights by Stacey Barr. 20/05/2014
No comments:
Post a Comment