When my targets change mid-period, I want a stable measure, so my work is not judged by a criterion created after I did it.

Job context

Who

Someone with targets set from above

When

Mid-period and at the end

Trigger

Targets changing in the second month of a quarter

Situation

Strategy moves faster than the measurement cycle

Constraints

Pay and promotion are tied to those targets

5 Pains

• Targets change mid-period

  High

  And the work already done does not count.

  Root cause: Strategy moves faster than the review cycle

• Targets set without asking whoever delivers

  High

  So some are impossible from the start.

  Root cause: Targets are divided backwards from a total set above

• What is measured is what is measurable

  High

  So people do what is measured.

  Root cause: A metric must be countable to enter the evaluation system

• Results depend on things outside their control

  Medium

  While the accountability stays.

  Root cause: Targets are assigned individually and outcomes are produced jointly

• Nobody revisits old targets after a change

  Medium

  They stay in the evaluation system.

  Root cause: Amending assigned targets needs a process nobody wants to open

5 Desired Outcomes

• Have a measure that holds across the period

  Functional

• Be asked before targets are fixed

  Social

• Be measured by what actually matters

  Functional

• Be accountable only for what they control

  Social

• Have old targets adjusted when the direction changes

  Functional

5 Existing Solutions

A solution is not the same thing as a product, a customer can hire a behaviour or a workaround too.

• Record the original targets in writing

  Workaround

  Protects you later without preventing the change.

• Renegotiate as soon as the direction changes

  Behaviour

  The soundest response, requiring an awkward conversation.

• Work toward both directions at once

  Workaround

  The safest route, halving the resources on each.

• Focus on what is measured

  Behaviour

  A rational response to the system, at the expense of what matters more.

• Record what was outside their control

  Behaviour

  Useful at review, and read as making excuses.

2 Opportunity Gaps

• Evaluation systems demand countable metrics because only countable things enter a system, while what determines a piece of work's value usually is not countable, so people do what is measured.

  Why existing solutions fail: A metric must apply to hundreds of people and survive dispute, so it must be coarse, and each step taken to make it dispute-proof moves it further from what matters.

  Potential opportunity: Pairing a coarse metric with a written judgement carrying concrete examples, rather than keeping the number alone.

• Strategy moves at the market's rhythm while targets are fixed at the financial year's, and whoever executes stands exactly between the two.

  Why existing solutions fail: Amending assigned targets means reopening a process tied to pay and promotion, which nobody wants to do mid-cycle, so the old targets stay in the system while the work has gone elsewhere.

  Potential opportunity: A mandatory target adjustment attached to every change of direction, treated as part of changing direction.