How do we identify and audit Scorecard metrics that drive unintended negative behaviors across our operational teams?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

You get what you measure, and if you measure an isolated activity without tracking its quality or downstream impact, your team will optimize for the metric at the expense of the business. When employees are held accountable to a single number, they will find the path of least resistance to keep that number green.

For example, if you track customer support tickets closed per week, support reps will rush through tickets, close complex issues prematurely, and ignore difficult problems to hit their target. The Scorecard stays green while client satisfaction crashes. Similarly, if you measure outbound sales calls, reps will dial unqualified contacts just to log numbers, leaving your sales pipeline completely dry.

To audit your Scorecard for perverse incentives, conduct a quarterly metric review:
- Trace each metric to its downstream consequence. Does hitting this volume target create bottlenecks or rework for the next seat on the Accountability Chart?
- Look for disconnects where an activity is hitting targets while the corresponding outcome fails. If outbound calls hit 100 percent of target but meetings booked are at zero, the metric is being gamed.
- Implement paired metrics. Balance every speed or volume metric with a quality or conversion counterweight. Pair outbound calls with qualified discovery calls booked. Pair tickets closed with first-contact resolution percentage or customer satisfaction scores.

If hitting a Scorecard goal creates operational friction, the metric is broken. Recalibrate the measurable to track completed units of work that meet an explicit standard of quality before they can be counted as a hit.