This is the problem with both SMART goals and OKRs. They purport to be meaningful by measuring results, but results are outside of one's control and subject to the inputs of lady Fortune!
What we want to incentivise is not success, but the kind of behaviour that leads to success. But that, on the other hand, suffers even worse from Goodhart's law.
Cedric Chin dug deeply into this dilemma[1] about a year ago. His suggestion is to frequently follow up on both behaviour metrics and result metrics to build a tacit understanding of how one is affected by another. This then allows you to focus improvements on behaviour metrics, which are mostly in your control.
I have yet to try putting it to practise, but I like the idea.
Comments
This is the problem with both SMART goals and OKRs. They purport to be meaningful by measuring results, but results are outside of one's control and subject to the inputs of lady Fortune!
What we want to incentivise is not success, but the kind of behaviour that leads to success. But that, on the other hand, suffers even worse from Goodhart's law.
Cedric Chin dug deeply into this dilemma[1] about a year ago. His suggestion is to frequently follow up on both behaviour metrics and result metrics to build a tacit understanding of how one is affected by another. This then allows you to focus improvements on behaviour metrics, which are mostly in your control.
I have yet to try putting it to practise, but I like the idea.
[1]: https://commoncog.com/goodharts-law-not-useful/