Yesterday, a friend posted on Facebook a link to an article, The Quantified Welp: A new study suggests that measuring an activity makes it less enjoyable. She asked, “What are the implications for outcomes measurement/management and evaluation in the nonprofit sector?”

I wrote several comments, which I’ll try to gather into a meaningful blog post.

First, the article, seems to contract itself saying the research “proposes that the more you quantify something that’s rewarding for its own sake, the less likely you are to enjoy it—and the less likely you are, too, to do more of it." Yet when you read further, you get "Those who got numerical feedback on their works in progress—'you have colored one shape,' etc.—colored more shapes but reported enjoying it less."

It seems like measuring something in fact makes people more productive, but less happy. If you want productive employees, measure them. If you want happy employees, don't. This, of course, illustrates the need for balance. Of course we want our employees to be as productive as possible, so meaningful measurements can be beneficial. However, if the measurements aren’t really meaningful, aren’t really helping the organization achieve its mission, then the measurements are detrimental. The challenge is to find the right level of meaningful measurements.

The research also doesn't appear to take into consideration the issue that one of the other people commenting on the post brought up about competition. The study does not seem to factor in the reward of competition. Not only would it be interesting to see how this changes for more competitive and less competitive people, but also how it changes if you have a leader board, badges, or other recognitions for measuring well. Would we then see people high on the leaderboard happier and those lower on the leader board less happy?

All of this seems to fit nicely with research on the demotivational effects of higher salaries. It also makes me think of the OpEd in the New York Times by Robert Wachter last month, How Measurement Fails Doctors and Teachers. I’m also interested in how this fits into discussions about the future of the church in the United States; church growth and the ‘slow church movement’.