Menu

Digital Transformation

You cannot measure success if you never defined it

A strategy without a clear definition of success quickly becomes impossible to evaluate, no matter how much activity it generates.

Why strategies lose clarity when outcomes are left vague, and why defining success early is what makes progress measurable rather than assumed.

01 May 20244 min read

In short

Why strategies lose clarity when outcomes are left vague, and why defining success early is what makes progress measurable rather than assumed.

Why vague goals create invisible problems

are often built around goals that feel directionally right (improving experience, increasing , driving growth), but when you look closer, those goals are rarely translated into something concrete enough to measure. At the beginning, this doesn't feel like a problem. There's around intent, teams understand broadly what they're trying to achieve, and work begins to move forward. Progress is visible in the form of new features, redesigned journeys, and improved interfaces. From the outside, everything appears to be working. The problem only becomes visible later, because without a clear definition of success, there's no way to know if any of it is actually effective.

Ambiguity is often what allowed the goal to be agreed in the first place. Improving the experience means something slightly different to every person who nodded at it, and that shared approval is worth more in the room than a specific target would have been. The cost arrives later, when nobody can say whether it happened.

Without a clear definition of success, work can look productive for a long time without anyone knowing whether it is actually working.

How outputs start to replace outcomes

What tends to happen instead is that proxies are used. milestones become a substitute for progress. Outputs are mistaken for outcomes. A new is launched, a journey is redesigned, a is updated, and each of these moments is treated as evidence that the strategy is working. In reality, they're only evidence that work has been completed.

When success isn't clearly defined, it becomes easy to reinterpret results in a positive light. If hasn't improved, gets highlighted instead. If engagement is flat, attention shifts to . There's always another metric that can be used to justify progress, but none of it provides a clear answer to the original question: is this actually working?

Metric substitution is easy to spot once you know the shape. If the number being reported this quarter is not the number that was promised last quarter, and nobody has mentioned the change, the measure is being chosen to fit the result rather than the other way round.

Key takeaway

When outcomes are vague, teams naturally start using activity and movement as a substitute for impact.

What changes when success is defined properly

A strong doesn't just describe what's going to be done. It defines what will be different as a result. That difference needs to be specific enough to measure, but also meaningful enough to reflect real impact, not just superficial change.

That often means moving beyond generic metrics. Increasing isn't just about driving more clicks on a button. It might be about reducing hesitation in a booking journey, increasing at key , or removing friction that causes users to abandon. Measuring success in that context requires understanding where users struggle, what causes them to drop off, and how changes in the experience affect their behaviour. This is where measurement and strategy need to be tightly connected.

A useful discipline is to write the target down with a date and a direction before the work begins, and to keep it visible afterwards. It does not need to be sophisticated. It needs to be specific enough that somebody could later say it did not happen.

It is also worth agreeing what would count as evidence that the approach is wrong. Teams define success routinely and almost never define failure, which is why work rarely stops even when it is clearly not delivering.

Why teams often define metrics too late

In practice, that connection is often missing. Metrics are defined after the work has started, or worse, after it's been completed. At that point, measurement becomes rather than intentional. Teams look for in the that might indicate success, rather than having clear indicators established from the outset.

When success is defined early and clearly, it creates focus. Teams understand what they're aiming for, decisions can be evaluated against a consistent set of criteria, and progress can be measured in a way that reflects real impact. It also makes it easier to stop. If something isn't delivering against the defined measures of success, it becomes clear that a change is needed. Without clear measures, those decisions become far more difficult, and work often continues simply because there's no objective reason to stop. Measuring success isn't about reporting. It's about .

Defining it late has a second cost beyond the reporting. You often discover you were not collecting what you needed. The event was never tracked, the baseline was never taken, and the question cannot be answered retrospectively at any price.

Written by Andy Scott

Strategic design, UX and digital transformation thinking from real projects.

LET'S WORK TOGETHER

Ready to improve your product?

UX, research and product leadership for teams tackling complex digital services.

Previous feedback

I had a fantastic experience working with Andy. One of his most impressive achievements during our time at NHS HEE was masterminding a deeply complex information architecture for a new platform that brought together a large number of legacy websites.

Will Parkhouse

Senior Content Designer