Notes

The other sections are practical. These are positions. For a related reference, see workforce analytics software.

On why the measured and the important diverge. Instrumentation decides availability, availability decides use, and use confers importance backwards. No individual decision in that chain is wrong, and the outcome is a management practice built around whatever the tooling happened to emit.

On who publishes workforce research. Five kinds of source and only one with no direct stake. Use vendor findings for direction and treat the magnitude as theirs, since the number was produced by somebody selling the remedy.

On the productivity dashboard, which is defensible at aggregate level and not at individual level, because its errors are systematic rather than random. It persists because a screen of figures answers "how are things" without anybody forming a view.

And on what this site cannot verify — including that one source here is peer-reviewed and the rest is survey data and vendor research, labelled at every use.

• Against the Dashboard

  It aggregates the measurable, updates without anybody deciding anything, and produces confidence unrelated to understanding.

• The Measured and the Important

  Why organisations reliably measure the wrong things, stated as a mechanism rather than as a complaint about managers.

• What We Cannot Verify

  Seven limits on what this site knows, including how much of its evidence comes from companies selling the remedy.

• Who Publishes This Research

  Five kinds of source behind workforce statistics, and how much weight to give a figure once you know who produced it.

For additional context on this topic, see Pexels.