Metric Gaming

Metric Gaming is an anti-pattern where individuals or teams intentionally manipulate actions to improve metrics rather than improving the underlying work. This erodes trust in data, distorts incentives, and weakens the connection between engineering performance and product value.

Background and Context

Well-chosen metrics drive alignment and focus. But when those metrics become goals rather than signals, they are prone to abuse. As Goodhart’s Law states: “When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.”

Gaming often happens subtly. Teams may batch work to inflate throughput or delay merges to improve review time. The system appears healthy on the dashboard while actual progress suffers.

Root Causes of Metric Distortion

This anti-pattern is typically fueled by pressure, visibility, or misunderstanding. Common causes include:

• KPIs tied too directly to performance reviews or promotions
• Lack of context around what metrics are meant to signal
• Dashboards that prioritize optics over insight
• Top-down mandates that reward surface-level performance

Incentives shape behavior, even if unintentionally.

Impact of Misaligned Metrics

Metric gaming can quietly degrade both delivery and culture. Consequences include:

• False confidence in team or system health
• Distrust in dashboards and analytics platforms
• Delayed or fragmented delivery to hit targets
• Misalignment between engineering activities and user outcomes

A metric that is manipulated stops being useful and starts doing harm.

Warning Signs of Metric Gaming

This anti-pattern shows up in behavior patterns and metric trends. Look for:

• Metrics improving without corresponding business or quality gains
• Work structured to optimize reporting rather than delivery
• Engineers adjusting sprint stories, PR sizes, or timing to fit targets
• Teams hesitant to change flawed metrics due to optics

If a metric looks great but feels wrong, it probably is.

Metrics to Reveal Metric Gaming

Ironically, detecting gaming requires using metrics thoughtfully. These minware indicators can help:

Metric	Signal
Cycle Time	Sudden drops paired with low quality or rework suggest artificial acceleration.
Rework Rate	High rework after rapid completions signals corners being cut to hit metrics.
Sprint Scope Creep	Frequent re-scoping to meet sprint goals often points to gaming behavior.

Reliable metrics reflect real behavior, not performative ones.

How to Prevent Metric Gaming

To discourage this anti-pattern:

• Use metrics as tools for inquiry, not judgment
• Focus on a balanced set of leading and lagging indicators
• Encourage storytelling alongside data in retros and reviews
• Design incentives around learning and improvement, not perfection

Healthy metrics spark discussion, not manipulation.

How to Reset a Gaming-Driven Culture

If metrics are currently being gamed:

• Identify and publicly retire any misleading indicators
• Re-center discussions on value, outcomes, and quality
• Build psychological safety around metric visibility
• Share examples where honest reporting enabled improvement

Measurement should reflect reality. If it does not, change the behavior or change the metric.