Try to formulate the VFPs for various employees that work near you and then watch what they are actually working on. For many of the posts, you will easily name their product but for some could be unclear. If you’re finding it difficult to formulate these VFPs, I can assure you that your employees are even less clear on what should their work results. It’s not at all surprising that most HR managers believe that their product is "hired employees", while executives expect them to provide "productive employees". While advertising specialists believe their product is creating a "memorable advertisement" rather than, "people who walk into the store as a result of the advertisement".

A VFP is applied to a particular position, but can also be applied to projects, a task or an order. It’s quite appropriate to accurately define the VFP of a task you assign. Defining a VFP will result in less “almost dones” from your employees. Good production in any field starts with a clear understanding of the result that needs to be obtained.

A professional in a specialized field, such as a chef or painter, can easily tell you their VFP. They would even be surprised you asked them about it. While with executives, you will often find that instead of their product, they list the actions they perform. Department heads will confidently tell you that their products are, "well-organized work", "high performance" or even "ensuring employees are provided with everything they need to do their jobs”. But that is not it! The VFP of an executive is what his entire department produces.

Take a crew of house painters as an example. A foreman will plan, assign tasks, ensure that the work gets done, coordinate the actions of the team with other departments, and perform many other functions. This activity is the "doingness". The VFP of a worker in his crew is obvious: painted walls. He has several workers who produce this VFP and he, as manager, is running the activity. His own VFP is the VFP of all the workers as a whole, i.e. the VFP of the whole crew. Once this is understood, it is not difficult to formulate his VFP as, "professional quality painting jobs completed on time". The foreman’s customers are expecting this product and willingly pay specifically for that. If a foreman can't get that VFP through executive actions, such as orders or assigning tasks, he simply picks up a brush and begins to paint the walls himself. He could at least achieve the crew’s VFP in that fashion.

In a similar vein, if the head of a company cannot get the company’s VFP produced through executive means, he rolls up the sleeves and finds customers, makes sales, creates advertisements, handles unhappy customers, etc. He does all this because he is responsible for the VFP of the company as a whole. Executives, as a rule, are responsible people, and, quite often, experts in the area they manage. Unfortunately, their expertise thwarts their ability to be good executives, and instead of learning and using management tools, they do the work of their juniors. It may seem very responsible to take the initiative and show an employee how to do the work. But in that moment when the executive demonstrates his wall-painting mastery, nobody is doing the job of the executive… Usually, an executive can replace his juniors, but not vice versa.

Imagine the foreman of a crew of a couple dozen painters, and, instead of ensuring productive and well-coordinated work, he personally takes a brush to the wall. Good control of workers can significantly increase the crew’s performance, compared to simply being an extra pair of hands. A competent sales manager with five salespeople in his department can significantly increase the sales volume if he plans the work out, sets targets, supervises the work, corrects errors, and demands results rather than personally closing the sales.