Interpretive blurring KPI is detrimental
fukkyy It is much more important to ask whether this KPI can be remembered and interpreted by everyone in the organization without blurring than to argue about the slight amount of explanatory power that this KPI correctly predicts the outcome (smart people like to argue this one). (Smart people like this argument), it is much more important whether this KPI can be remembered and interpreted by everyone in the organization without blurring.
yuiseki_ this ！！！！ Strangely complicated KPIs that are even a little bit unclear in interpretation are very bad because they increase the communication cost a lot in the future, and it is better not to have such KPIs.
fukkyy KPIs should be simple, note to align what simple means.
A KPI is a leading indicator of a desired outcome or desired state, is tied to individual actions (actionable), is expressed as a number rather than a rate, can be broken down into parallel teams and added together to form a total, can be measured in the shortest possible cycle, and can explain many of the results with a single variable rather than multiple variables. One variable, not multiple variables, can explain most of the results.
This shall be simple.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/解釈ブレるKPIは有害 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.