The rapid advances of technology in data and information systems have benefited organizations tremendously. Every behavior turns into a result, and controls are designed to capture results that can be converted into useable data. However, the difference between “control” – the direction and actions of key tasks, and “controls” – past data processed through a systematic result is extensive. Closing the gap between data analysis and effective behavior is a common hardship affecting the modern executive of the 21st century and beyond.

The idea of controls started during the age of scientific management which was common in the 1890’s-1920’s. By understanding continuous processes that led to results, quality control programs were put in place where workers completing effective tasks lead to an expected result. At the time, this management practice was working, an assembler that would put an axle on an automobile a hundred times a day would convert into higher productivity or increased car sales due to demand.

This simple productivity equation would be:

Amount of Car Axles on Automobile  x  Hours Worked  =  Worker Productivity

If worker productivity is down and there was no change in hours, the clear result would be “Jake is putting out a lower amount of car axles”. This could then be corrected and fixed in basic organizations.

In today’s larger organizations, the equation has now changed from simple mathematics to calculus and probability equations. Productivity within a factory decreasing can be due to a number of factors: internal or external. A decrease in productivity can be the result of events out of control, or could be multiple instances that are difficult to record as controls: employee morale, pay structure and hierarchal configurations.

Even if one could see these variables in advance, one does still not know what the effective ones are to work on let alone know if it is even meaningful. One organization may attribute productivity results to passive management and empowering workers while another may be more active and keep tight control on their associates. Neither view is right nor wrong; the difference is the controls measured that drive the goals and mission of the organization.

Executives need to decide the right controls to be measuring in their organization as the wrong controls guarantee under-performance along with employee frustration. The controls must be tied into the goals and mission of the organization and be converted into results; which in turn dictates past behavior flourishing future control. The ability to effectively analyze what the right and wrong actions were can help executives and management build a plan on how to impact business positively in the future.