Lean-based Metrics for Agile CM Environments by by Brad Appleton, Robert Cowham and Steve Berczuk:

I agree measuring individuals is normally not an effective way improve. And “measuring up” can often be valuable. Often a fixation on small process measures can result in improvements that don’t actually improve the end result. But rather than the measure up view, I find looking at outcome measures (to measure overall effectiveness) and process measures (for viewing specific parts of the system “big picture”) the most useful strategy.

The reason for process measures is not to improve those results alone. But those process measures can be selected to measure key processes within the system. Say finding 3 process measures that if we can improve these then this important outcome measure will improve (using PDSA to make sure your prediction is accurate - don’t fall into the trap of focusing on improving that measure even after the data shows it does not result in the desired improvement to the overall results that was predicted).

Also, process measures are helpful in serving as indicators that something is going wrong (or potentially going better than normal). Process measures will change quickly (good ones can be close to real time) thus facilitate immediate remedies and immediate examination of what lead to the problem to aid in avoiding that condition in the future.

Very good idea. Focus on fewer measures and really pay attention to them. Don’t become buried by all the metrics that can be collected - take the time to see what measures matter and really pay attention to those measures. As you get an excellent handle on those then add some more that seem worthwhile (and don’t hesitate to remove some from your focus as you determine they are not as important).

Related: posts on metrics - Visible Data - Distorting the System (based on misreading data) - Edward Tufte’s new book: Beautiful Evidence - Measuring and Managing Performance in Organizations