3 ms·

"Only what’s measured is what matters" is much more sweeping than what I've usually heard, which is, "If you can't measure it, you can't manage it." I understa

"Only what’s measured is what matters" is much more sweeping than what I've usually heard, which is, "If you can't measure it, you can't manage it." I understand that managers may conflate the two. What really sticks in my craw about this mindset is that it's lowest-common denominator management. The spoken implication of metrics-driven management is to keep the organization focused on KPIs, but the unspoken implication is that employees can't be trusted. That is probably true for many employees, but not all. This lack of trust between management and employees is a big red flag for me, bigger than the hassle of micromanagement.

bdg 4y ago
> the unspoken implication is that employees can't be trusted. That is probably true for many employees, but not all There's an interesting reality here that managers hire and keep people in a state where they can't trust their direct reports. The manager is just as untrustworthy.
stevenjgarner 4y ago
Peter Drucker was originally attributed with "what gets measured, gets managed". It does NOT imply that everything that can be measured matters, or that if you cannot measure it you cannot manage it. Really important distinctions. But Peter never even said it [0] [0] https://medium.com/centre-for-public-impact/what-gets-measured-gets-managed-its-wrong-and-drucker-never-said-it-fe95886d3df6 https://medium.com/centre-for-public-impact/what-gets-measur...