Is there really anything new to say about KPIs in 2025? Maybe 😉. As the title suggests, today we're diving into a subtle but crucial distinction that regularly crops up in our consulting work — and often leads to confusion and misunderstandings: the difference between process indicators and outcome indicators.
Why the confusion?
This uncertainty often arises in projects or during work with management systems — typically ahead of a certification. But even without that pressure, teams frequently ask: “Do we need process indicators now, too?”
As experienced consultants, our answer is clear: Yes, KPIs are an essential part of any management and leadership toolkit. We've already covered how to derive meaningful KPIs in other posts. Here, however, we want to focus on what happens when that question is answered too hastily: “Apparently we need some KPIs, so let’s define a few to have something to show.”
That may sound a bit flippant, but exaggeration can help reveal where the real problems lie.
The pitfall of vague process KPIs
When teams lack experience with process indicators, they often resort to scanning their process map and assigning KPIs on the fly — usually ones that are already being measured in everyday operations. The result? Often, those KPIs end up reflecting broad business outcomes rather than offering any direct insight into the process itself.
A classic example: In sales, “annual revenue” is often used as a KPI. For service delivery, it might be overall customer satisfaction results.
Are these wrong? Not necessarily. There’s definitely a logical connection between, say, the quote preparation process and annual revenue, or between a product approval process and customer satisfaction. But here’s the problem: these outcome metrics aren’t great for evaluating the quality of the process or how consistently it’s being followed.
Let’s flip the perspective: Instead of thinking from the process toward the outcome, try it the other way around. Ask: What influences a particular result?
What really affects the outcome?
Take revenue as an example. Several factors contribute to this result:
Even this simplified breakdown — focusing only on process, personnel, and resources — shows that outcome indicators like revenue only offer indirect insight into process performance. Still, when developing or executing a business strategy, it’s valuable to know which processes drive which outcomes (like revenue, customer satisfaction, staff turnover, overhead, etc.). But outcome indicators alone don’t tell you whether your processes are running well — and that’s exactly what process indicators are for.
No one-size-fits-all approach
Is there a clear hierarchy among process, people, and resources in terms of their influence on outcomes? Even if we use methods like the Balanced Scorecard to map cause-and-effect relationships, there’s no universal logic that applies to all situations. It depends on the process and its context.
Here’s a basic model:
And yet, despite these differences in emphasis, all three factors tend to play a role at the same time. A solid process structure provides the foundation — even when you're working with highly skilled people or state-of-the-art machinery.
The takeaway
Outcome indicators are important. So is mapping the cause-effect relationships that lead to those outcomes. But for a complete picture, you also need proper process indicators — and they should be grounded in a solid methodology. Our recommendation: derive your process indicators based on clearly identified critical success factors. That’s how you move from vague reporting to truly actionable process insights.
Sign in to get in touch with Carsten directly.
We are happy to provide you with inspiring content, current events and news.
