tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8732821.post5262344481705803756..comments2020-04-16T18:14:53.935-04:00Comments on Mike's Blog: Measurement 101Mike Polenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11918747335132207317noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8732821.post-25848857791351523162010-06-15T17:05:38.587-04:002010-06-15T17:05:38.587-04:00Interesting post Mike,
In finance, we measure agai...Interesting post Mike,<br />In finance, we measure against an benchmark which could be an index or composition of a set of indices. However beating a benchmark does not mean you reach your goal if you take extra risk. Therefore, tolerance for risk must be added into the goal which in turn needs to be measured. For example, goal: beating the S&P index with portfolio beta < 1. Or reducing waist size without the 10% reduction of calories intake. The point here is that a goal for measurement needs to have constraints to properly assess the validity or fairness of reaching the goal.<br />-WillWilliam Leenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8732821.post-62741629181951168842010-06-11T14:19:56.687-04:002010-06-11T14:19:56.687-04:00Here I thought you tuned me out during all of mind...Here I thought you tuned me out during all of mind-numbing discussions. <br /><br />It is very true that when people focus on the metric and lose sight of the goal, almost certainly the metric will become bias (either intentionally or unintentionally). <br /><br />In your example the measurement analyst and the metrics consumer/decision maker are one in the same. In this instance there is very little to be gained by biasing the data. <br /><br />I have found (and very recently reconfirmed) that when the data collector, analyst, and decision maker involve more than one person (and many times several people) that integrating the metrics into a single information product including situational awareness is essential to the metric's value and overall perceived creditabilty. <br /><br />I enjoyed your post!<br /><br />Chris MillerChrisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8732821.post-9769914328613062162010-06-06T10:18:11.505-04:002010-06-06T10:18:11.505-04:00I wonder if you read the whole post ;-)
Point A i...I wonder if you read the whole post ;-) <br />Point A is a good point as goal measures can be tricky and simply keeping track and asking the team a simple question "do we believe the gaol is this much better/worse as the measure states?" in retrospective (all healthy teams use this :-)<br /><br />Point B not sure what the "measurement process" refers. Do you work for the federal government?<br /><br />Point C was addressed "Be careful not to believe the measures are the goal as this trap will lead to manipulation and a false sense of where you are."Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17298652803887065946noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8732821.post-32717737665950872212010-06-06T10:13:42.603-04:002010-06-06T10:13:42.603-04:00Its hard to argue with the statement that "un...Its hard to argue with the statement that "unless you know where you're going, you won't know when you get there". So yes, I do agree that measurement is an important part of the process. However, you have to be very careful that:<br /><br />a> The metric selected is a simple, widely understood metric (such as Mike's waist size)<br />b> The measurement process is accurate and actually represents something meaningful (as opposed to something like the federal deficit reports or the monthly jobs creation reports)<br />c> The metric doesn't become the goal itself - it stays a measure of progress towards the goal.<br /><br />-PooravPooravnoreply@blogger.com