Our operations leader insists that projects completed on time is a leading indicator because it predicts client satisfaction. I think it is a lagging metric that only tells us what already happened. How do we break this deadlock and identify the true upstream activities that predict delivery delays?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Your operations leader is confusing a lagging output with a leading activity. Projects completed on time is a lagging indicator. By the time you realize a project is late, the damage is already done, the client is frustrated, and your team is in firefighting mode. To run on data, you must push upstream to find the leading indicators that predict success.

A true leading indicator must pass two tests: it must be activity-based, and it must be measurable weekly. It is the work that must happen today to ensure your projects are completed on time next month.

To resolve this deadlock, look at the milestones that must be met before a project is finished. For example, instead of tracking completed projects, your operational Scorecard should track:

- Percentage of project kick-off meetings completed on schedule
- Weekly hours logged against budget on active projects
- Number of open client feedback requests resolved within forty-eight hours

If these upstream metrics are green, your projects will naturally finish on time. If they go red, you have an early warning signal that allows you to adjust resources before you miss your final deadline. Bring this framework to your next Level 10 Meeting™ and IDS® the issue. Force your operations head to look at the work that drives the output, not the output itself. This is how you transition from reactive management to proactive leadership.