People

What Is Our Metric Fixation Really Costing Us?

Metric investigation concept with a magnifying glass looking at a graph

Published On: 22nd Oct 2026 08:00

What’s really happening when the numbers look good – but the reality tells a different story? Here, Danny Wareham explains why we gravitate towards metrics so much, and how a better understanding of the paradox of metric fixation can help drive real performance improvements.

On Paper, Performance Is Improving – In Practice, Something Has Been Lost

A contact centre team is celebrating. Their Average Handling Time has fallen by 18 seconds, adherence is above target, and customer satisfaction is holding steady. The dashboard glows green.

And yet the complaints continue!

Customers are calling back because their issue was never fully resolved. Advisors are feeling rushed and emotionally depleted. Team leaders spend more time discussing percentages than listening to calls, whilst senior leaders ask why the Net Promoter Score remains stubbornly flat.

On paper, performance is improving. In practice, something important has been lost.

The Target Ceases to Be a Signpost and Becomes the Destination

This is the paradox of metric fixation. Measures that were designed to indicate performance can gradually become the performance itself. The target ceases to be a signpost and becomes the destination.

In psychology, this reflects a well-known phenomenon called goal displacement. A measure intended to help people focus on an underlying objective begins to replace the objective altogether.

The organization no longer pursues subjective service, quality, or loyalty. It pursues a seemingly objective number that supposedly represents them.

Metrics are useful. They bring structure, accountability, and visibility. Problems arise when the metric becomes the centre of attention and the human behaviours that drive it fade into the background.

For advice on how to spot if you are chasing metrics, read our article: Are Your Team Leaders Too Busy Chasing Metrics?

Metrics Help Us Navigate Complex Systems by Reducing Them to Something Measurable

Think of metrics as maps. They help us navigate complex systems by reducing them to something measurable. The provide signposts and mile markers.

But a map is neither the territory nor the journey itself.

Average Handling Time (AHT) is not efficiency. It is a numerical representation of one aspect of call duration.
Customer Satisfaction (CSAT) is not service quality. It is a snapshot of how a subset of customers felt after an interaction.
Net Promoter Score (NPS) is not loyalty. It is an estimate of a customer’s willingness to recommend.
Adherence is not commitment. It is a measure of how closely schedules are followed.

Each metric tells part of the story. But none tells the whole story.

When leaders forget this distinction, operational conversations naturally become narrower. The question shifts from “What behaviours create great experiences?” to “How do we move the score?”

People Naturally Direct Their Energy Toward What Is Measured and Rewarded

“When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.”

This principle, known as Goodhart’s Law (named for the economist Charles Goodhart), appears in almost every contact centre.

If advisors are pressured to reduce AHT, they may interrupt customers, transfer calls unnecessarily, or avoid emotionally complex conversations.
If CSAT becomes the dominant target, advisors may over-accommodate unreasonable requests or ask customers explicitly for positive survey scores.
If NPS becomes the central obsession, organizations may focus on incremental score changes rather than examining the root causes of customer frustration.

None of these behaviours is necessarily malicious. Most are rational adaptations to the system and the focus on specific performance metrics.

Psychologists call this the “principle of least effort.” People naturally direct their energy toward what is measured, rewarded, and discussed. If success is defined by the score, the score becomes the work.

Metrics Reduce Complexity to a Single Figure and Offer a Sense of Progress

Human beings are uncomfortable with ambiguity – and metrics create an illusion of certainty. Numbers feel objective, concrete, and controllable. They reduce complexity to a single figure and offer a sense of progress.

This can be reassuring for leaders operating in demanding environments.

AHT is 412 seconds; CSAT is 86%; NPS is 34; Adherence is 95%.

These figures appear precise. They fit neatly into reports and board packs. They make performance feel manageable. (And we do love a Red Amber Green status in contact centres).

But customer service is a profoundly human activity. It involves empathy, judgement, emotional regulation, and problem-solving under uncertainty. Much of what matters most is difficult to quantify.

Psychologist Donald Campbell warned that the more a quantitative indicator is used for decision-making, the more likely it is to distort the process it is intended to monitor. This insight, known as Campbell’s Law, is especially relevant in service environments where quality depends on subtle human interactions.

A number is easy to see. The behaviour beneath it is harder to observe, but far more important.

But, with the focus on the output, the result is compliance rather than commitment; people do what is measured but stop giving what cannot be measured.

For advice on how to give agents clarity on their metrics, read our article: Do Your Agents Really Know What “Good” Looks Like?

A More Useful Question Is: “Why Is NPS 34?”

Net Promoter Score is widely used across customer experience functions as a proxy for loyalty and advocacy. It can be helpful when interpreted alongside other evidence.

Used in isolation, however, it often encourages superficial thinking.

A leadership team might ask: “How do we increase NPS from 34 to 40?”

This sounds strategic, but it treats the score as the problem.

A more useful question is: “Why is NPS 34?”

That question opens a very different conversation, with more curiosity about the potential drivers:

Customers may be struggling with a confusing IVR journey.
Policies may create avoidable friction.
Back-office delays may undermine otherwise excellent service.
Advisors may be emotionally exhausted and less able to show empathy.
Processes may force customers to repeat information across channels.

NPS is the outcome. The causes lie elsewhere. The same logic applies to almost every operational metric.

The Role of Leadership Is Not to Demand Better Numbers – But to Create the Conditions That Make Better Numbers More Likely

Metrics are lagging indicators. They tell us what has already happened.

Meanwhile, behaviour is the leading indicator. If advisors demonstrate active listening, take ownership, communicate clearly, and use sound judgement, customer outcomes will usually improve.

If systems are intuitive, policies are sensible, and staffing levels are sustainable, those behaviours become easier to sustain.

The role of leadership is not to demand better numbers. It is to create the conditions that make better numbers more likely.

This is a subtle but important shift.

Rather than asking: “How do we reduce AHT?”, leaders might ask:

“Are advisors equipped to diagnose issues quickly?”
“Do systems require unnecessary navigation?”
“Are knowledge articles easy to find?”
“Are customers reaching the right team first time?”

Rather than asking: “How do we improve CSAT?”, leaders might ask:

“Are advisors given enough autonomy to solve problems?”
“Are policies creating avoidable disappointment?”
“Are workloads affecting emotional energy and patience?”

Rather than asking: “How do we increase NPS?”, leaders might ask:

“Where does customer effort remain unnecessarily high?”
“Which moments create frustration or distrust?”
“What obstacles prevent advisors from delivering a smoother experience?”

The focus moves from chasing the signal to improving the underlying system.

Autonomy Is Reduced When People Feel Controlled by Rigid Numerical Targets

Edward Deci and Richard Ryan argue in Self-Determination Theory that people thrive when three psychological needs are met: autonomy, competence, and relatedness.

Metric fixation can undermine all three.

Autonomy is reduced when people feel controlled by rigid numerical targets; competence is threatened when success is defined narrowly, ignoring the full complexity of the role; and relatedness weakens when customer interactions become transactional rather than meaningful.

When these needs are frustrated, motivation becomes extrinsic and fragile. People focus on avoiding criticism rather than delivering excellent service.

Conversely, when organizations support these needs, performance becomes more adaptive and resilient. Advisors are more likely to use judgement, engage fully, and persist through challenging interactions, and the metrics improve as a consequence.

The Most Effective Leaders Treat Metrics as Diagnostic Tools – Not Behavioural Levers

The most effective leaders treat metrics as diagnostic tools, not behavioural levers. They view a score as a prompt to enquiry rather than as a trigger for a command:

If AHT rises, this may indicate increasing complexity, inefficient systems, or a need for additional coaching.
If CSAT falls, it may reflect policy constraints, customer expectations, or advisor fatigue.
If adherence drops, it may signal burnout, disengagement, or unrealistic schedules.
If NPS stagnates, it may reveal friction far beyond the contact centre.

To great leaders, the metric is not the answer. It is the invitation to investigate.

This approach reflects systems thinking. Outcomes emerge from the interaction between people, processes, technology, and culture. Sustainable improvement comes from understanding these relationships rather than pressuring individuals to move a number.

When Rewards Focus on Behaviours and Learning, People Optimize for the Customer

If organizations want different outcomes, they should reinforce the behaviours that create those outcomes.

Recognize advisors who:

Show empathy during emotionally difficult calls
Take ownership of complex issues
Use sound judgement
Collaborate to solve recurring problems
Share insights that improve processes

Celebrate team leaders who:

Coach effectively
Build psychological safety
Reduce barriers to performance
Help advisors develop confidence and skill

When rewards focus exclusively on numerical targets, people optimize for the metric. When rewards focus on behaviours and learning, people optimize for the customer.

Every Metric Is Merely a Shadow Cast by Something Deeper

Metrics do matter. Without them, organizations lose visibility and discipline.

But every metric is merely a shadow cast by something deeper.

AHT reflects clarity, confidence, and system efficiency.
CSAT reflects empathy, ownership, and expectation management.
NPS reflects trust, ease, and the cumulative experience customers have across the organization.

It is worth observing the shadow. It is important to consider the metric. But, just like shadow puppeteers, focusing on the metric will only allow for it to be influenced in the short term. If leaders want better numbers, they should look upstream to the behaviours, structures, and cultural conditions that generate them.

★★★★★

Metrics Can Point Us in the Right Direction – But They Cannot Tell Us How to Travel

A map can tell us where we are, but it cannot drive the vehicle.

Metrics can point us in the right direction, but they cannot tell us how to travel. They are shadows cast by the interaction of people, processes, technology, and culture. And shadows only change when something shifts at the source.

The most meaningful improvements rarely come from staring harder at the map. When leaders become preoccupied with the mile markers, they risk losing sight of the journey itself.

Instead, we must ask better questions:

What is making customers call back?
What is draining advisors of energy?
Which processes create unnecessary friction?
Where are people forced to work around the system rather than with it?

The answers lie in the everyday behaviour of people working within systems that either support them or constrain them. Metrics can reveal patterns, but they do not create trust, empathy, ownership, or sound judgement.

When leaders shift their attention from the score to the behaviours and conditions that shape it, performance becomes more sustainable, more meaningful, and ultimately more human. The dashboard may still glow green, but this time it reflects something real and worth measuring.

Written by: Danny Wareham, Founder & Director of Firgun

References:

Campbell, D. T. (1976). Assessing the impact of planned social change. The Public Affairs Center, Dartmouth College. https://www.globalhivmeinfo.org/Capacity%20Building/Occasional%20Papers/08%20Assessing%20the%20impact%20of%20planned%20social%20change.pdf

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Goodhart, C. A. E. (1975). Problems of monetary management: The U.K. experience. In Papers in monetary economics (Vol. 1, pp. 91–121). Reserve Bank of Australia.

Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. University of California Press.

Merton, R. K. (1940). Bureaucratic structure and personality. Social Forces, 18(4), 560–568. https://doi.org/10.2307/2570634

Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Addison-Wesley.

If you are looking for more information on using metrics in the contact centre, read these articles next:

Author
Danny Wareham

Danny Wareham, Founder & Director of Firgun

Danny is a Certified Business Psychologist, coach and speaker with 25+ years of experience across organisations and contact centres in retail, telecommunication, and fintech sectors.

Connect to Danny on LinkedIn