How to Use Soft Metrics to Develop Your Team's Skills

Most advice on soft metrics focuses on what to measure: employee engagement, communication quality, collaboration. But measurement is not the problem; discussion is. Soft metrics fail when saved for quarterly reviews, and succeed when discussed frequently and informally.

Why Soft Metrics Fail (and How to Fix It)

Whenever I mention that managers should pay attention to soft metrics (qualitative assessments like meeting effectiveness, communication quality, and problem-solving approach) I get a divided reaction. Half of the audience nods. The other half frowns, anticipating uncomfortable conversations and subjective disagreements.

Both are right, depending on how you use these metrics.

If you discuss soft metrics infrequently, say, once a quarter or less, they will cause friction. You and your subordinate will likely differ in your assessment. Worse, if this discussion takes place during a formal performance review, it leads to defensiveness, blame, or frustration.

But if you discuss soft metrics frequently (at least once a month) and in informal settings (say, at the end of a one-on-one on another topic), the conversation becomes open and constructive. The same metric, discussed differently, produces opposite outcomes.

The Superiority of Soft Metrics for Skill Development

Soft metrics are exceptional tools for developing skills and effectiveness. Allow me a basketball example: if a player struggles with scoring, setting a hard metric like "points per game" only helps if their limitation is motivation. If their shooting technique needs improvement, this metric may actually encourage counterproductive behaviors, such as taking poor-quality shots to meet their target.ShareCopy Conversely, a soft metric like "shot selection quality," discussed frequently after games and practices, addresses the underlying skill gap and leads to sustainable improvement.

How to Set and Evaluate Soft Metrics Effectively

Soft metrics require more definition than hard ones. When you set a hard metric like "$5M in revenue," the meaning and measurement are clear.

Conversely, when you set soft metrics, you cannot assume that your delegee knows what a good outcome means. For example, what does “running effective meetings” look like?

The key is to give examples of what the good and the bad would look like. What does it look like when meetings are run ineffectively? And what does it look like when they are run effectively?

Even better, I like to use my “bad/good/great” framework, which also includes what great performance would look like.

Finally, avoid the temptation to measure soft metrics using hard outcomes (e.g., measuring meeting effectiveness by project completion rates). While convenient, this approach fails to develop the specific skills that need improvement.

Examples of Effective Soft Metrics

Here are concrete examples of soft metrics with the bad/good/great framework:

Meeting Effectiveness:

• Bad: Meetings run over time, lack clear agendas, participants are unprepared, decisions are unclear
• Good: Meetings start on time with a clear agenda, relevant people attend, decisions are documented
• Great: Meetings achieve progress, and people look forward to attending them, as opposed to seeing them as a distraction from their core job

Communication Quality:

• Bad: Emails are unclear, require multiple back-and-forths to understand, use jargon without explanation
• Good: Messages are clear and concise, key points are highlighted, context is provided when needed
• Great: Communication anticipates questions, provides all necessary context upfront, uses the appropriate medium for the message

Problem-Solving Approach:

• Bad: Jumps to solutions without understanding the problem, doesn't consider multiple options
• Good: Defines the problem clearly, considers a few alternatives, explains reasoning for chosen solution
• Great: Validates assumptions talking with the people directly involved, deeply understands root causes, evaluates trade-offs systematically, anticipates second-order effects

Conclusion

Complement your hard metrics with carefully selected soft metrics to support your team's development. Provide concrete examples of what bad, good, and great performance looks like for each soft metric. Most importantly, discuss performance frequently in low-pressure settings rather than saving these conversations for formal reviews.

Implement this approach consistently, and within a few months, you will see both soft and hard metrics improve as your team develops new capabilities and greater effectiveness.