Velocity Misuse and Performance Pressure: Rethinking Agile Metrics
Agile introduced velocity as a simple tool: a way for teams to estimate how much work they can deliver in a sprint, supporting better planning and realistic forecasting. Yet, over time, velocity has been repurposed—and sometimes misused—as a performance metric, leading to unintended consequences for teams and organizations.The Problem: Planning Tool or Performance Benchmark?Velocity was never meant to be a Key Performance Indicator (KPI) or a tool for comparing teams. However, it’s common to see organizations:
The Ethical DilemmaWhen velocity becomes the yardstick for performance, teams face a fundamental question:
A New Direction: Value and Outcomes Over OutputThe hottest trend in Agile metrics is a move away from output-based measurements like velocity toward value-driven and outcomes-based approaches. This shift means:
The Bottom Line: Velocity is a useful planning tool—but it’s not a measure of team worth. The future of Agile metrics lies in focusing on value, outcomes, and ethical practices that support both team wellbeing and organizational goals. How is your team measuring success? Are your metrics driving value—or just numbers? |
Manifesto for Enterprise Agility alignment with PMI's Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
| In one of my webinars dedicated to the Agile Enterprise,, I stated that Ethics is the foundation of Agility. This blog ia review of the recently published Manifesto for Enterprise Agility. The Agile Enterprise is not a new concept; it was coined in 1990's by the Agility Forum, a group of experts, academics, and executives that predicted the changes that the 21st Century would bring. The new manifesto emphasizes purpose, transparency, learning, and sustainable ways of working. It can be used as ethical guardrails to make Agile commitments more explicit so Agile can’t be misused to justify “speed over integrity.” Responsibility (own decisions, actions, consequences)The manifesto explicitly frames disruption as requiring better decisions, adaptive plans, guardrails, and “making risk visible (and actionable).” That supports responsible stewardship of outcomes and resources, and it signals accountability rather than reckless autonomy.Phrases like “move quickly… with incomplete data,” “cut out small decisions,” and “replace approval structures with trust” can be interpreted as bypassing due diligence. The PMI Code also carries an obligation to comply with laws, regulations, and organizational policies; the manifesto implies this via “guardrails,” but doesn’t state it. Respect (regard for people and resources entrusted to us)“Human centricity amidst change,” “sustainably deliver value,” “change fatigue,” and emphasis on empathy, trust, and psychological safety are directly aligned with respect for people and well-being.The manifesto says “continuous learning” and “learning from failure,” which is positive, but it could be strengthened by stating that accountability is non-punitive while still addressing misconduct or repeated negligence. Also, “distributed talent” and ecosystem language should avoid treating partners/suppliers as interchangeable capacity. Fairness (impartiality; avoid favoritism and competing self-interest)“Shared enterprise outcomes over functional optimization” and “work visible” encourage objective prioritization and reduce hidden agendas. Ecosystem collaboration also supports fair dealings with stakeholders.“Move authority to where value is created,” and dynamic funding can unintentionally increase favoritism if decision criteria aren’t transparent. The excerpt does not explicitly address conflicts of interest, procurement ethics, or equitable access to opportunities. Honesty (truthful communications and conduct)The manifesto repeatedly promotes visibility: “make work visible,” “progress, dependencies, and risk visible,” “govern through visibility,” and “evidence-based agility / ground-truth facts.” This is strongly consistent with honesty as PMI defines it.The main risk is operationalizing “visibility” with metrics that get gamed; the manifesto could pre-empt that by stating metrics are used ethically (to learn, not to mislead). |



