When managers attempt to use a measurement program as a tool for motivating desired behaviors, they may reward people or projects based on their performance with regard to just one or two metrics. Public tracking charts may be pointed out as showing desirable or undesirable results. This can cause practitioners to hide their data, thereby avoiding the risk of public management scrutiny. I know of an organization that posted charts in the developers’ work area showing various project metrics. One day a senior manager walked through the area and made comments about which charts looked good and which not so good. The developers cleared the walls by the next morning.

Managers might emphasize getting "the numbers" where they want them to be instead of hearing what the data is telling them. As with Trap #3, the behavioral changes stimulated by attempts at motivational measurement may not be the ones you really want.

Metrics data is intrinsically neither virtuous nor evil, simply informative. Using metrics to motivate rather than to learn has the potential of leading to dysfunctional behavior, in which the results obtained are not consistent with the goals intended by the motivator. Metrics dysfunction can involve inappropriately optimizing one software dimension at the expense of others, or reporting fabricated data to tell managers what they want to hear.

Stress to the participants the need for accurate data if you are to understand the current reality and take appropriate actions. Use the data to understand discrepancies between your quality and productivity goals and the current performance so your team can improve its processes accordingly. The process improvement program defines the desired behaviors. The metrics program shows whether you’re getting the results you want.