Updated 16/08/24
By Matthew Fraser, Socitm technical consultant
At the end of April 2018, I completed my first long distance cycle event, Etape Loch Ness. It was 66 miles (106km) on closed roads, around one of the most beautiful parts of Scotland.
In the weeks after I often had the same conversation with most of my friends. First, they would they ask, “How did it go?”. I’d tell them it went well. That the weather was good – albeit a little cold to start – and the whole event was organised well.
When they asked, “How long did it take?”, I gave a very precise answer. Thanks to a timing chip provided by the event, I knew it took me 3 hours 59 minutes and 31 seconds.
For those who were only being polite, those two questions were sufficient. But others followed up with, “Is that good?”. Now that is the tricky question to answer. After all, what constitutes a ‘good’ time? I know that the event organisers weren’t packing up when I crossed the finish line, so that is a helpful indicator. Although perhaps that only means that they expected some to be slow.
However, I do have some experience in objectively determining what ‘good’ should be. In my work with Socitm’s benchmarking service, I’ve spent time developing online dashboards that allow organisations to easily compare how ‘good’ they are. So, it made sense to apply similar methods to my finish time.
Fortunately, I had two friends (we’ll call them Dave and Dan – because that is their names) who also completed the event. If I knew their times, it could tell me if I was ‘good’.
Dave finished in 4 hours 12 minutes. I told him that was a good time, while inwardly congratulating myself that I’d beaten him by a massive 13 minutes. Dan’s response however provided another emotion, he completed the course in 2 hours 56 minutes!
I was instantly deflated, perhaps Dave and I were amongst the slowest on the day. But then I remembered my work with benchmarking. We regularly stress that you can’t base your assumptions on just asking a few neighbouring organisations.
Despite being friends who lived in the same town, Dave, Dan and I were quite different. Dave was over 50 and did little training. But he’s a former Royal Marine with an active job. Dan had a desk job like me, but was in his early 30s and took his training very seriously. I was somewhere in the middle of both.
Whether you are comparing ICT services or athletic prowess, more data provides a better conclusion.
Turning to the Etape website, I found I could view all the final times. Here was the data I needed. The website also had results for the last four years. However, unlike our reports where you can compare over a decade of data, it wasn’t possible to combine the different years together to build a massive dataset. That year’s results revealed that out of a field of 4,341, I finished in 1401st place. After my earlier despair, this was pleasing news. I’d just squeezed into the top third.
Of course, my overall position only tells part of the story. I don’t know how many of my fellow cyclists were slowed by punctures, or the desire to take lots of the pictures (I only took the one above). We overcome this difficulty in benchmarking by having workshops where participants can openly discuss the reasons behind their relative successes and failures. (Organising something similar for four thousand cyclists just to write a blog might be a little excessive).
Another comparison that we encourage and facilitate is to compare against yourself. If you’ve taken part in Socitm’s previous benchmarking services, you can quickly see where you are enhancing your service.
Applying a similar approach, I looked over my past data (fortunately, I record all my cycling data using an app on my phone). It reveals that the Etape was my longest ride in both distance and duration. It was also one of my fastest.
After considering all the above, I now had an answer to “Is that good?”. My time was ‘reasonably good’. It’s possible to go faster but I didn’t embarrass myself. I shouldn’t rest on my laurels, but neither should I throw out the bike. Thanks to all this research, if friends questioned me further, I had the figures to justify my answer.
Learning from past data
You may be interested to know that I was able to take all this benchmarking a step further in August 2021, when I returned to the Etape for a second time. But on that occasion I looked at the data before the event.
Not only did I have my own past data, but during the intervening years more friends had taken part so I could also compare against them. The results helped me to see that while my 2018 time was “good”, it could have been better. So, I re-adjusted my goals and planned to finish in 3 hours 30 minutes. I trained harder and rode the event a bit cleverer and successfully shaved 20 minutes off my previous best!
A similar effect often occurs for organisations that achieve a good benchmark. By reviewing the data they identify small areas of improvement by noting what has been achieved by others. This can lead them to set targets and action plans that they may previously have not thought of.
Of course that was three years ago, so you are probably wondering how I would compare now. Maybe it is time to test myself again. Similarly, if you have benchmarked with us in the past is it now time for you to retest how your organisation is performing.
Measuring and comparing
If you were asked if your ICT service was ‘good’, what would you say? Do you have evidence to back up any feelings that you are already excelling, or could do with better funding? Socitm’s benchmarking services can help you compare the size, performance and cost-efficiency of your ICT. Helping you to concentrate your efforts for improvement or make a case for improved funding.
For a quick overview of the features and benefits we can provide, take a look at our benchmarking infographic below.
