Our operations team is closing delivery tickets at a record pace to keep their weekly scorecard green, but client complaints about unresolved issues are spiking. How do we prevent our team from redefining completed work just to game their weekly numbers?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

This is the classic trap of tracking volume without tracking quality. When you set a purely activity-based target like tickets closed, human nature kicks in. Your team will optimize for the metric even if it means closing tickets prematurely or pushing half-baked solutions. You have a gaming problem because your scorecard lacks a counter-balancing metric.

To solve this, every volume-based leading indicator must be paired with a quality constraint owned by the same seat on the Accountability Chart. For your delivery seat, do not just track tickets closed. Pair that metric with a quality-control metric, such as zero reopened tickets within seven days, or a spot-check quality score.

If they close fifty tickets but ten are reopened, the quality metric turns red, and the entire scorecard category is marked as a miss. This forces the team to prioritize actual completion over speed. Bring this dynamic to your next Level 10 Meeting™ and use IDS® to restructure the measurable. When your team knows they cannot game the system by shifting definitions, they will self-correct. Running on data means tracking the truth, not just high activity numbers that mask broken processes.