Target & Alignment Metrics

Most performance management systems contain a flaw that is rarely discussed openly: the act of measuring something changes how people behave around it. Teams optimize for the number, not the outcome that the number was supposed to represent. The Target and Alignment Metrics system was developed to solve this problem by design, not by hoping people resist the incentive to game their own results.

The Problem

Goodhart's Law is a structural reality, not a personal failure.

When a call centre is measured solely on average handle time, staff find ways to reduce it—regardless of whether the problem is actually solved.

Standard frameworks fail because they treat measurement as an isolated event. This creates dashboards full of green while the underlying business health quietly deteriorates.

The Solution

TAM harnesses human incentive instead of fighting it.

By pairing an objective driver (Indicator) with a subjective quality measure (Target), we create a structural tension that makes metric gaming mathematically impossible.

The system turns evaluation into verifiable evidence. When both metrics improve, you have proof that the work is genuinely effective.

The Divergence Story

Scroll to see what happens when Average Handle Time becomes a target.

Phase 1: The Baseline

A new initiative is launched to reduce Average Handle Time. The core assumption: faster calls equal a better customer experience.

Phase 2: The Initial Push

Agents begin rushing through calls. AHT drops, but first-contact resolution drops alongside it as complex problems aren't fully diagnosed.

Phase 3: The Perverse Incentive

Agents start transferring difficult calls prematurely to keep their individual handle times low. Customers are bounced between departments.

Phase 4: Direct Gaming

Metric gaming takes hold. Agents open multiple small tickets for a single issue to dilute the average. Admin work spikes.

The Invisible Divergence

AHT hit its target and the dashboard is green. But the underlying business is degrading. Invisible without Target & Alignment Metrics.

Indicator Metric
25m
Average Handle Time
Target Metric
82%
Customer Satisfaction
AHT15m20m25mCSAT82%75%66%MONTHS IN PRODUCTION ➔

The Architecture of a Metric Pair

Target Metrics

Measure the real outcome: what customers or stakeholders actually experience. Inherently subjective and difficult for one person to game in isolation.

Common Examples
  • Customer satisfaction score (CSAT)
  • Employee engagement rating
  • Renewal rate

Indicator Metrics

Measure the operational driver: the specific activity that produces improvement in the target if done correctly. Actionable and objective.

Common Examples
  • Average handle time (AHT)
  • First contact resolution rate
  • Response time latency

The diagnostic power of TAM comes from the relationship between the two metrics. When they diverge, something is wrong with either the measurement or the incentive.That divergence signal is completely invisible if only one metric is tracked.

Real-World Scenarios

How single-metric traps play out across different industries.

Customer Success

Volume over Value

Indicator:Tickets Resolved
Target:CSAT Score

Teams close tickets prematurely to hit volume targets, causing CSAT to plummet as issues aren't actually fixed.

Sales Operations

Activity over Quality

Indicator:Outbound Calls
Target:Sales Velocity

Reps make 100+ low-quality calls a day to hit quotas, but conversion rates drop because the leads aren't qualified.

Software Engineering

Speed over Stability

Indicator:Deployment Frequency
Target:System Availability

Engineers push code faster to meet 'Agile' goals, but change failure rates spike, leading to costly system outages.

How To Deploy TAM

Implementation Workflow

01

Define Outcome

Articulate success as a subjective quality metric that reflects actual experience.

02

Identify Driver

Select the objective activity that should logically produce that outcome.

03

Pair & Observe

Track both together. If they diverge, investigate the structural incentive.

04

Calibrate Pair

Adjust the indicator to ensure it remains a true predictor of the target outcome.

05

Scale Solution

Roll out the validated metric pair across the entire department or organization.

06

Continuous Audit

Regularly verify that the pair still accurately signals genuine performance.

Who This Is For

TAM is most valuable in any situation where performance is being measured and where the people being measured have any ability to influence how the numbers look. That describes virtually every organization. It is particularly critical in customer-facing operations, service delivery functions, and any change initiative where demonstrating results matters. If the measurement system can be gamed, it will be. This framework ensures it cannot.

Let's Connect

I'm always open to discussing new projects, sharing ideas, or exploring opportunities for collaboration. Reach out to start a conversation.