The measurement is not the goal.

It is possible that there have never been more measurements than right now, and the ability to measure continues to increase. No matter how effective we get at measuring something, there will always be the need to stop and remember that the measurement is not the goal. If you agree or disagree, I would like to hear about it, and examples from your industries. Below is an example from mine. 

I help companies reduce their environmental impact and increase the value of their company.  If I only focused on reducing environmental impact, then I would score very high on that metric if a company went out of business. The opposite is true as well. If we focus solely on company value, then I may contribute to a massive and irreparable environmental impact. 

A good example is a measurement we call diversion. Diversion is how much waste is diverted from going to a landfill and into some other use and is usually reported as a percent. 80% diversion means that 80% of a company’s waste (by weight) is not going to a landfill. But what is the goal? If the goal is to reduce environmental impact, then by picking diversion as our metric, we can limit ourselves in reaching our underlying goal.

• Company A diverts 80% of 100 kilos of waste, equals 20 kilos to landfill.
• Company B diverts 80% of 100,000 kilos of waste, equals 20,000 kilos to landfill.

Company B’s value is assumed to be much higher because growth correlates with increased waste, but so is actual environmental impact because so much more is going to landfill. A measurement of 80% diversion is achieved, but a goal is missed.

On other hand a goal without a measurement is not useful either, so what can be done? Is it possible to create a goal and a measurement that are in perfect harmony and will always be so?