Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Aggile delivery is based on trust; “Individuals and interactions over processes and tools” and “Working software over comprehensive documentation” are two of the core values, often misinterpreted as a replacement of traditional ‘rigid’ governance. Initially, a challenge to the success of Lean Six Sigma and Agile, intentionally or not, didn’t provide specific metrics, seen as a sign of risk-averse organisations. However, in the quest for higher performance, and without clear and specific Agile metrics, organizations often turn to metrics from Lean Six Sigma—such as cycle time, throughput, defect rates, and process efficiency—to measure the success of Agile projects. These metrics seem objective and actionable, promising to optimize the flow of work. However, a deep ethical debate simmers beneath the surface: Are we measuring what truly matters? Are we rewarding teams for activity, or for genuine customer value? This blog post explores the ethical dilemma of measuring output versus measuring value in Agile environments, from an ethical perspective.
Blog post: Measuring Output vs. Measuring Value, using Lean Six Sigma metrics to measure Agile projects. An Ethical Reflection
Project Manager | Driving Clean Energy Innovations for a Sustainable Future| Canadian Nuclear Laboratories Ontario, Canada
We use output metrics such as cycle time, throughput, and defects to monitor delivery performance, but we measure success through outcomes such as user adoption, business benefits, risk reduction, and stakeholder satisfaction. Output tells us how efficiently we deliver; outcomes tell us whether we delivered something that matters. The key is ensuring metrics support value creation, not become the goal themselves.
...
1 reply by Stelian ROMAN
Sep 28, 2026 5:38 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
Thank you, Zakaria. How are "cycle time, throughput, and defects" related to value to the customer? I agree that user adoption and stakeholder satisfaction could be indirect measures of value to the customer, but I wonder if the project will have access to business benefits and risk-reduction metrics from end users.
Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Sep 28, 2026 11:01 AM
Replying to Zakaria Botros
...
We use output metrics such as cycle time, throughput, and defects to monitor delivery performance, but we measure success through outcomes such as user adoption, business benefits, risk reduction, and stakeholder satisfaction. Output tells us how efficiently we deliver; outcomes tell us whether we delivered something that matters. The key is ensuring metrics support value creation, not become the goal themselves.
Thank you, Zakaria. How are "cycle time, throughput, and defects" related to value to the customer? I agree that user adoption and stakeholder satisfaction could be indirect measures of value to the customer, but I wonder if the project will have access to business benefits and risk-reduction metrics from end users. Saving Changes...
Great question, but I'd gently push back on the either/or framing. It's like "doing the right thing" versus "doing the thing right." I believe it's both: "doing the right thing right".
In my projects, we put a dollar figure on the value delivered and also track timelines closely. We bring products to market after technology transfers, where external dependencies make timing critical. Being on time is value, and so are the creative solutions that help us honor commitments to clients and health organizations.
Output metrics only become a problem when they're disconnected from outcomes. How do you manage this in your projects?
...
1 reply by Stelian ROMAN
Sep 30, 2026 11:39 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
"In my projects, we put a dollar figure on the value delivered". I use ping-pong ball value estimation with the PO. The dollar value will be decided by the market.
Program Manager| HARPER SRLSanto Domingo / Distrito Nacional, Dominican Republic
I think both are useful, but they answer different questions. Metrics like cycle time, throughput, or defects can tell us how the team is performing and where the process may need improvement, but they don’t necessarily tell us whether we are creating value. I prefer using those metrics to understand and improve delivery while also tracking whether what we deliver is actually producing the expected outcome for the customer or the business.
...
1 reply by Stelian ROMAN
Sep 30, 2026 11:42 PM
Stelian ROMAN
...
"Metrics like cycle time, throughput, or defects can tell us how the team is performing and where the process may need improvement" I agree, they are metrics 'borrowed' from Lean Six Sigma to measure process efficiency. From the customer's point of view, process output metrics are irrelevant. Outcome metrics must be established and measured by the beneficiary of the project output.
Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Sep 30, 2026 3:31 PM
Replying to Eduard Hernandez
...
Great question, but I'd gently push back on the either/or framing. It's like "doing the right thing" versus "doing the thing right." I believe it's both: "doing the right thing right".
In my projects, we put a dollar figure on the value delivered and also track timelines closely. We bring products to market after technology transfers, where external dependencies make timing critical. Being on time is value, and so are the creative solutions that help us honor commitments to clients and health organizations.
Output metrics only become a problem when they're disconnected from outcomes. How do you manage this in your projects?
"In my projects, we put a dollar figure on the value delivered". I use ping-pong ball value estimation with the PO. The dollar value will be decided by the market. Saving Changes...
Stelian ROMANProject Manager| MicroSafetyCarlingford, New South Wales, Australia
Sep 30, 2026 3:36 PM
Replying to Lissette Indhira Pimentel Sosa
...
I think both are useful, but they answer different questions. Metrics like cycle time, throughput, or defects can tell us how the team is performing and where the process may need improvement, but they don’t necessarily tell us whether we are creating value. I prefer using those metrics to understand and improve delivery while also tracking whether what we deliver is actually producing the expected outcome for the customer or the business.
"Metrics like cycle time, throughput, or defects can tell us how the team is performing and where the process may need improvement" I agree, they are metrics 'borrowed' from Lean Six Sigma to measure process efficiency. From the customer's point of view, process output metrics are irrelevant. Outcome metrics must be established and measured by the beneficiary of the project output. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
