Big shoutout to Matt Wash for jumping in and teaming up with me on this topic. We had some great chats during our collaboration!
Introduction
We readily embrace real-time data to boost our physical performance, whether through fitness trackers monitoring heart rate and calorie expenditure or professional sports teams analysing player metrics during games. Yet, ironically, in the workplace, where we spend significantly more time than at the gym, we rarely leverage real-time data to assess or improve our business’s health and overall employee well-being.
Ignoring real-time performance
Consider the NBA: teams historically focused heavily on two-point shots due to their perceived safety. However, detailed analytics revealed a surprising insight—the expected value of a three-pointer, calculated as the probability of success multiplied by the points awarded, has consistently exceeded the expected value of two-pointers since the early 1990s. Teams didn’t simply develop better shooters spontaneously; the strategic pivot towards three-pointers was significantly data-driven, based on clear insights about maximising scoring efficiency.
This example contrasts with how most businesses approach performance data. Many organisations track vast arrays of KPIs to monitor activity, but quantity doesn’t guarantee clarity. Marty Cagan points out that while outcomes are measured with KPIs, most aren’t useful for measuring whether you’re solving the right problem. In other words, data alone isn’t the issue—it’s whether the data reflects meaningful progress. Without defining the specific problem to solve, businesses risk focusing on what’s easy to measure instead of what truly matters. Companies often ignore similar opportunities, hesitating to apply analogous real-time data to assess and enhance their “business health,” even though doing so could dramatically improve performance and productivity.
Overcoming the fear of data or the paralysis of collecting them
Many organisations shy away from detailed analytics due to fear of accountability, exposing inefficiencies, or being perceived as overly intrusive. Managers frequently avoid engaging deeply with data that may reveal uncomfortable truths, such as inefficient workflows or outdated billing models. This hesitation mirrors a broader pattern we’ve explored before in “Fear is not an option?” Ironically, businesses become immobilised precisely because they’re wary of what precise metrics might uncover.
Many companies still don’t gather or analyse data how they need to. Focusing mainly on the industry’s outputs and get-delivered mindset, they treat analytics and instrumentation as optional. Teams avoid defining the right measures of success, either because they don’t know how to do it or simply because the infrastructure to track them doesn’t yet exist.
Implementing a data-fit culture
Adopting a data-driven culture isn’t just about getting lost in dashboards or obsessing over KPIs. It’s really about learning how to ask better questions and figuring out if we’re actually making things better. This change can be tough for a lot of organisations because it means they need to be clear about what success looks like and brave enough to admit when things aren’t going well. It also calls for new ways of working: getting better at collecting data, shifting our focus from outputs to outcomes, and being willing to act on what the data tells us.
It’s clear that organisations don’t struggle because they lack data; they struggle because they avoid facing the reality of it. For teams serious about improving business health, real-time performance isn’t just for athletes—it’s a necessary evolution in the way of working.
Conclusion
The same mindset that avoids performance metrics often avoids bigger conversations around change. But how can we expect to evolve if we can’t face data?
Perhaps the narrative needs to change from innovation to evolution. While firms treat innovation as a nice-to-have that is only practiced by a select few, typically in their own time, will we continue to fight for scraps and the lowest fee wins mentality? Many organisations are outsourcing or offshoring low-value tasks. While this achieves a short-term financial goal of reducing labor costs, does it really shift the dial? It is often possible to eliminate the need to carry out the task by taking advantage of lean principles, but we can remove it altogether. However, this requires the practice of the five whys or a similar post-mortem analysis that we are uncomfortable with. Darwin’s theory of evolution shows that it will be survival of the fittest, and those who replace innovation with evolution will be the ones who thrive.