Measurements, Metrics and Rubrics - What's the Difference?

I was about twelve years old when I saved up money from my paper route to buy a speedometer for my bicycle. Unfortunately much of what I measured since then has been rather inconsequential. However some things are well worth measuring. In working with mission organizations and churches, I am constantly challenging them to measure what is being accomplished so they can know how to better invest their resources.

When referring to measuring things, there are two terms which are used interchangeably: measurements and metrics. A third term which is used less often but can be just as important is rubric. In the interests of full disclosure you need to know that I have never taken a stats course nor do I consider myself any kind of expert. So only read this if you fumble around with these terms in the same way I have.

Suppose your job performance was evaluated by your supervisor and you were given a 4. That would be a measurement. And while that measurement is very important, the number itself is virtually meaningless. First of all you don't know if you were being measured on a scale of 1 to 10 or 1 to 5. The scale is the metric. Stated differently, 60 kilometers per hour provides you with a measurement and a metric. Knowing that you are “doing 60”, can be a real problem if you don't know what the metric is. Driving 60 miles per hour in a 60 kilometer per hour zone may result in a speeding ticket. Conversely knowing that the speed limit is in kilometers per hour (a metric) is not helpful if you don't know how fast (a measurement) you are going. As such, both a measurement and a metric are vital.

Now let's go back to that job performance where you received a 4 out of 5. What we still don’t know is specifically what was being evaluated. For the sake of illustration let's look at the evaluation being based on your punctuality. Your supervisor has given you a 4 out of 5 without clearly defining why she has landed on that particular number. So what you need is a rubric; a chart that spells out what qualifies you for a 5 or a 4 etc. You would receive a 5 out of 5 if you had never been late within the evaluation period. If you were late once by five minutes, you could not receive a 5. A 4 out of 5 might mean that you were late only one time and the one time you were late was not by more than fifteen minutes.

In summary you know what was measured, the standard of measurement (the metric) and how the measurement was arrived at (the rubric).

So what does this have to do with anything?

Any ministry needs to effectively evaluate the accomplishment of Ends. It wants to be able to describe what an effective ministry would look like. In Policy Governance vernacular it does that by describing it Ends (what is the benefit, who are the beneficiaries and what would be an acceptable cost). Then it needs to measure the effective accomplishment of its Ends by developing metrics and in some cases a rubric.

If your ministry is worth doing, the results are worth being measured.

A Policy Governance® Fable

Once upon a time, long long ago a boy named Ted Hull created a recipe for Ted’s Temptingly Tantalizing Tomato Turnover.  So delighted was he by what he had made that he decided to register the name and trademark his recipe. This way no one could modify his delightful dessert and still call it Ted’s Temptingly Tantalizing Tomato Turnover, while still having the recipe available to the general public. The ingredients and directions were posted on walls throughout the village, shared by friends until it eventually became famous around the world.

By and by, some who fancied themselves as chefs sought to improve upon the recipe. This was done by leaving some ingredients out and using less of others. Some people actually went so far as to replace the tomatoes with blueberries.  Sadly some of those same chefs, even those who replaced the tomatoes with blueberries, continued to call the boy’s legally registered recipe “Ted’s Tempting Tantalizing Tomato Turnover”. 

Once upon a time long ago - like over thirty years ago - a man named John Carver created a governance model and called it Policy Governance^®.  He put together the ingredients and the instructions for how the ingredients needed to be mixed. The ingredients and directions were posted on pages of the internet and it became famous around the world.

By and by, some who fancied themselves as governance experts sought to improve upon the model. This was done primarily by leaving out some ingredients and using less of others. While this is the prerogative of the self-proclaimed experts, sadly they continued to call what they concocted Policy Governance^®.

Ted’s Temptingly Tantalizing Tomato Turnover and Policy Governance^® have at least one thing (and arguably only one thing) in common: they are both owned by someone. While there are people who believe the product can be improved upon, they have no right to make those improvements and call it by the same name.

In the interests of full disclosure let me tell you that Ted Hull is as familiar with a kitchen as a seven year old is with the cockpit of a Boeing 777. So please do not send for the recipe. It is so secret that even he doesn’t know what’s in it.

However Ted is familiar with organizations that are using Policy Governance^® but leave out some of the ingredients. He talked to a pastor recently who said that his church had introduced Policy Governance^®. When he asked the pastor if the board was monitoring compliance to the policies, the pastor told Ted that he was “self-monitoring”.  Ted doesn’t know what other ingredients were substituted or left out, but in our allegory the pastor essentially replaced the tomatoes with blueberries and continued to call it Ted’s Temptingly Tantalizing Tomato Turnover.

This is not a lesson in telling you how to bake or how to govern an organization. It is a reminder that when you change the ingredients and alter the directions of Policy Governance^® it isn’t Policy Governance^® anymore.