Evaluating Engagement Metrics

Most teams pick metrics that sound smart… But under the hood, they’re just noisy, slow, misleading, or biased. But today, I'm giving you a framework to avoid that trap. It’s called STEDII and it’s how to choose metrics you can actually trust: — ONE: S — Sensitivity Your metric should be able to detect small but meaningful changes Most good features don’t move numbers by 50%. They move them by 2–5%. If your metric can’t pick up those subtle shifts , you’ll miss real wins. Rule of thumb: - Basic metrics detect 10% changes - Good ones detect 5% - Great ones? 2% The better your metric, the smaller the lift it can detect. But that also means needing more users and better experimental design. — TWO: T — Trustworthiness Ever launch a clearly better feature… but the metric goes down? Happens all the time. Users find what they need faster → Time on site drops Checkout becomes smoother → Session length declines A good metric should reflect actual product value, not just surface-level activity. If metrics move in the opposite direction of user experience, they’re not trustworthy. — THREE: E — Efficiency In experimentation, speed of learning = speed of shipping. Some metrics take months to show signal (LTV, retention curves). Others like Day 2 retention or funnel completion give you insight within days. If your team is waiting weeks to know whether something worked, you're already behind. Use CUPED or proxy metrics to speed up testing windows without sacrificing signal. — FOUR: D — Debuggability A number that moves is nice. A number you can explain why something worked? That’s gold. Break down conversion into funnel steps. Segment by user type, device, geography. A 5% drop means nothing if you don’t know whether it’s: → A mobile bug → A pricing issue → Or just one country behaving differently Debuggability turns your metrics into actual insight. — FIVE: I — Interpretability Your whole team should know what your metric means... And what to do when it changes. If your metric looks like this: Engagement Score = (0.3×PageViews + 0.2×Clicks - 0.1×Bounces + 0.25×ReturnRate)^0.5 You’re not driving action. You’re driving confusion. Keep it simple: Conversion drops → Check checkout flow Bounce rate spikes → Review messaging or speed Retention dips → Fix the week-one experience — SIX: I — Inclusivity Averages lie. Segments tell the truth. A metric that’s “up 5%” could still be hiding this: → Power users: +30% → New users (60% of base): -5% → Mobile users: -10% Look for Simpson’s Paradox. Make sure your “win” isn’t actually a loss for the majority. — To learn all the details, check out my deep dive with Ronny Kohavi, the legend himself: https://lnkd.in/eDWT5bDN

❌ Forget Reach. ✔️ Think Engagement.   I no longer take much notice of impression counts on my LinkedIn™ posts. Instead, I focus on engagement – the number of people who have reacted to, commented on or reposted my posts.   Why?   Because the number of feeds my posts are dropped into gives me little useful information.   But the engagement rate does. It tells me what percentage of those who saw my posts responded in some way, took some kind of action.   And that’s where the gold is!   🔷 Those numbers – and the people behind them – tell me who is interested in the information I’m sharing. 🔷 Those people might make good additions to my network if they’re not already part of it. 🔷 They might make ideal ‘associates’ as I heard Mark Williams describe it in an interview with Tony Restell last week. (An example of an associate is my relationship with Gina Balarin (CPM FAMI FCIM), the CEO’s Voice. We share the similar target customers but provide different services. Supporting each other widens both our circles of influence.) 🔷 They might be potential clients. 🔷 They could even become colleagues and close friends.   In the past 3 months engagement on my content has risen significantly. (The formula for this is the total number of reactions, reposts and comments on a post divided by the number of impressions.)   The increase over the previous 90 days is 32.2%. Meanwhile impressions are up a miserly 1.6% (no surprise there).   The content formats achieving the highest engagement are LinkedIn events and video posts.     But what unequivocally does best are posts involving others. Posts ABOUT others always do well. Posts TAGGING others in the text do well if those others respond.   Here’s an example of the impact that external interaction on content can have: our recent LinkedIn live with the Queen of Livestreaming, Gillian Whitney generated a 49.1% engagement rate. Why? Because after the event Gillian responded personally to every single comment. There are now well over 200 comments.  (Don’t forget events stay in our Activity section so remain visible long after other posts might have disappeared.)   Engagement rate is now our most important metric and one we’ll be keeping a close eye on for its potential to provide an ongoing source of interested and responsive additions to our network. Because this is where the gold is!   🔷🔷🔷🔷🔷   Looking to upgrade your LinkedIn knowledge? Check out linkability[.]biz for dozens of hours of content on how to leverage LinkedIn to achieve your professional goals.   Got something to add? 🔷 COMMENT 🔷 Would others find it useful? 🔷 REPOST 🔷 Want to see more like this? 🔷 🔔 🔷 Plan to refer back to this? 🔷 SAVE 🔷 Think I know my stuff? 🔷 ENDORSE 🔷   📌📌📌 Tip of the day – keeping your own set of post metrics (a simple spreadsheet is all you need) allows you to compare individual posts more closely than you can from your profile analytics.  

If your C-suite thinks LinkedIn is “fluffy,” prove them wrong with three metrics: Total reach, targeted reach, and new reach. Here’s how we track this data for our clients and help prove the impact of posting on LinkedIn. Most execs and marketers I talk to are excited about building a LinkedIn presence. But inevitably, the question I get at the end of every discovery call is: “How do we track this stuff?” It feels like there’s little way to know if this is actually making an impact. And even harder to justify to your CFO. So, here’s exactly how we track LinkedIn impact with our clients, and help them prove the ROI: 1. Total impressions (total reach) Track this because reach matters, but remember it’s not your North Star. If you only optimize for impressions, you’ll drift toward mass-appeal content that pulls you away from your ICP. 2. ICP engagement share (targeted reach) We enrich every like and reaction to see who’s engaging. The key metric: what % of those engagers are actually in your ICP? A post that gets fewer likes but a higher share of your ICP is far more valuable than a viral post outside your audience. This metric combined with total impressions is the true north star (total ICPs reached). 3. New content engagers (new reach) Echo chambers kill growth. You don’t just want the same people liking every post. Tracking how many new names engage each month shows whether your content is breaking into fresh circles. These numbers tell a story. For example, if your impressions go up, but ICP engagement goes down, you’re not optimizing for the right audience. Or, if your ICP engagement share stays the same, but new content engagers go up, it means you’re reaching more people within your target audience overall. Aside from those three core metrics, we also track: → Net new followers (a stronger signal than total followers) → Consistency (# of posts per month) → Quality signals (follow clicks, profile visits) The goal isn’t to chase vanity numbers. It’s to prove that your content is reaching the right people, in growing numbers, over time. That’s the story execs want to see. And it’s the story your LinkedIn data should be telling. 👋 I’m on a mission to master content strategy for B2B execs. I publish my findings weekly. Follow + learn with me in public.

Every PM wants to measure the success of their product. But most struggle to do it correctly. As a product management hiring manager, leader, and coach, I've seen that many product managers struggle with defining the right success metrics They focus on generic metrics like acquisition, engagement,  retention These are insufficient. My recommendation is to ask concrete questions when thinking of metrics Here's a list of questions I ask: 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 1. What is the user’s goal? 2. What human need do they want to fulfill? 3. What action signifies that their need is met? 4. Is that action enough to know user’s job is done? 5. How can I measure that action? 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘂𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗱𝗼𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 1. How many users are using the product? 2. How many users should be using it? 3. Which users aren't using it but should be using it? 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗺𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗲𝗻𝗷𝗼𝘆 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 1. How many users like the product? 2. How much do they like it? 3. What action(s) show they “like” it? 4. How can I measure those actions 5. Do they like it enough to keep coming back? 6. If yes, how often should they come back? 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗴𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 1. Are users finding it hard to complete certain actions? 2. Are there things that users dislike? 3. Are there enough options for users to choose from? 4. Are there things that users want to do, but the product doesn’t allow them to? 5. Can we measure all the above? 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗾𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗼𝗳 𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀 1. Can I cheat on any of the above metrics? 2. Do above metrics give the most accurate answer? 3. Are all metrics simple enough for everyone to understand? 𝗧𝗵𝗶𝗻𝗸 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘁 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗰𝘁 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁/𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 1. Are  above metrics a true representation of success? 2. Any other parts of user journey I should measure? 3. Will a positive impact on above metrics lead to a negative impact on other critical metrics? 4. Is the tradeoff acceptable? -- How easy or tough do you find creating success metrics? What is your process?

A lot of people think HR is hard to quantify. They’re not wrong. But they’re not entirely right either. You have to translate fuzzy terms into sharp metrics. “Improved employee experience” → Moved engagement scores from the 50th to the 25th percentile “Better hiring process” → Increased offer yield by 20% and reduced time to fill by 10 days The key? Track what matters—and explain why it matters in business terms. Here are a few of my go-to People KPIs and how I frame them: 📉 Time to Hire Why: Signals candidate experience + hiring velocity Target: <30 days from application to signed offer Tip: Track by recruiter, hiring manager, and role to surface friction 📈 Offer Acceptance Rate Why: Measures whether your comp, brand, and process are landing Target: >85% accepted offers Tip: Segment by source and team to spot drop-offs 🧭 Voluntary Regrettable Attrition Why: When your best people leave, it's a signal—not noise Target: <15% annually (varies by industry and average tenure) Tip: Cut by team, tenure, and manager to uncover hotspots 🌟 Talent Mobility Rate Why: Internal movement = career growth + retention Target: >15% promoted or transferred annually Tip: Combine with development plan adoption to build a stronger pipeline 💬 Employee Engagement (eNPS + Pulse) Why: Predicts performance, CX, and attrition risk Target: eNPS >30; Pulse trending up Tip: Segment by manager, function, and identity group Metrics like these turn HR from a gut-feel function into a strategic advantage. What are your favorite People KPIs? I’d love to hear what you’re tracking—drop your best one below 👇

The most overlooked metric in employee engagement? It’s not NPS. It’s not CSAT. It’s not even retention. It’s participation. If employees aren’t using the things you built to support them, what’s the point?  (And as a finance person watching money get lit on fire, I ask, WHAT IS THE POINT?) I track employee engagement by asking one simple question: Are people actually using what we offer? Digging deeper: Did they use their lifestyle benefits this month? Are they sending recognition to coworkers? Are they logging into the platform because it’s useful or because we forced it? We see 91%+ participation across our platform. That’s not luck. That’s intentional design. And it tells us something the fancy metrics can’t: People feel seen, supported, and invested in. So if you want to measure engagement... Start by looking at what people choose to engage with.

Too many advertisers obsess over one metric in isolation: ROAS, CTR, MER, etc. But Facebook ads don’t work in silos. To find and fix performance issues, you need to look at all the metrics together. Here’s how I do it. These are the 9 metrics I track, why they matter, and when they matter: Top 3 for General Business Performance: 💥 Cost Per Purchase This has to fit within your unit economics. If it’s too high, you’re losing money on every sale. A good campaign is profitable, period. 💥 ROAS (Return on Ad Spend) This shows whether your clicks are converting into valuable paying customers. It’s your direct line to revenue performance. 💥 Click-to-Purchase Conversion Rate (CVR) This metric bridges your ads and your website. Both should convert in the 1-2% range. If one is off, you know where to start optimizing. Top 3 for Ad Scalability: 🚀 Reach and Frequency For ads that have been live for a few weeks, these metrics highlight fatigue. A rising frequency means your ad is hitting the same people over and over instead of finding new ones. 🚀 Ad Set Purchase Volume Meta’s algorithm thrives on data. Hitting 7+ purchases per day per ad set (50+ per week) is critical for exiting the learning phase and unlocking better performance. 🚀 Cost Per New Customer Purchase Popsixle sends a separate bonus event for new customer purchases. This is a key metric for effectively running prospecting ads to scale up a business. Top 3 for Monitoring New Ad Creatives: 💣 CTR (Click-Through Rate) This is especially important for new ads in the learning phase. A CTR over 1.5% tells me an ad is doing its job of driving curiosity and clicks. 💣 Ad Quality, Engagement, and Conversion Rankings These rankings tell you how your creative performs across campaigns. Above average on all three dimensions is the standard of excellence. 💣 Incremental Reach Filter your campaigns to show only your new campaign and your previous top performing, top scaled campaign. Compare the reach of each campaign to the unduplicated reach in the summary to see if the new campaign is reaching incremental people. Summary: There’s no one metric that tells the full story. The magic happens when you connect the dots. What metrics do you rely on most to evaluate your Facebook ads?

The ROI of Listening: How Engagement Drives the Bottom Line "Engagement is HR fluff," declared Michael, the CFO of a mid-sized tech company. "Show me the numbers. Show me how this impacts our bottom line." As a finance leader with 20 years of experience, Michael believed in hard metrics—revenue, profit margins, operational costs. Employee engagement surveys? Those were just feel-good exercises that produced colorful charts but no actionable financial insights. His perspective changed dramatically when the company implemented Maxwell's real-time engagement analytics. For the first time, Michael could see the direct correlation between engagement metrics and financial outcomes. The data revealed startling patterns: Teams with declining engagement scores experienced 34% higher turnover, costing the company an average of$1.2 million annually in replacement costs alone. Projects led by managers with low listening scores took 28% longer to complete and had 3x more scope creep, directly impacting profit margins. Departments with high engagement scores generated 23% more revenue per employee and had 41% higher customer satisfaction ratings. "I was looking at engagement all wrong," Michael admits. "It's not a soft metric—it's a leading indicator of financial performance." The ROI became undeniable. By investing in Maxwell's real-time engagement platform, the company: Reduced turnover by 22% in the first year, saving over$800,000 in replacement costs. Improved project delivery times by identifying and addressing team friction points early. Increased innovation output by creating a culture where employees felt safe sharing ideas. Enhanced customer satisfaction by ensuring client-facing teams felt valued and supported. The most powerful insight? Traditional annual surveys had missed critical engagement dips that occurred between measurement periods. Maxwell's continuous listening approach allowed leaders to address issues in real-time, preventing small concerns from becoming expensive problems. "Now I understand," Michael says. "Listening isn't just good for employees—it's good for business. Every day we fail to hear our people is a day we're leaving money on the table." Are you measuring what matters? See the ROI of listening with Maxwell: https://lnkd.in/gR_YnqyU #EmployeeEngagement #BusinessROI #PeopleAnalytics #LeadershipInsights #WorkplaceCulture

STOP confusing activity with impact. Too many Customer Success pros are stuck in the mindset that more meetings = more value. Spoiler alert: it doesn’t. Over-indexing on engagement as a “win” without measuring the actual value of those interactions isn’t just ineffective—it’s a waste of everyone’s time. So, let’s break the cycle. Here’s what NOT to do: 🚫 Don’t schedule meetings just to “check in.” No one has time for fluff. If your customer can’t immediately answer why you’re meeting, you’ve already lost their attention. 🚫 Don’t treat meeting quantity as a success metric. Five meetings with no action items or outcomes? That’s not success; that’s just noise. 🚫 Don’t skip the follow-up. If your customer can’t point to something actionable that came out of the meeting, you’ve wasted both their time and yours. Now, here’s what to do differently: ✅ Make every meeting intentional. Before you hit “send” on that invite, ask yourself: “What’s the purpose? What value am I bringing?” If you can’t answer that, rethink the meeting. ✅ Focus on outcomes, not activity. Engagement isn’t about how often you’re in front of the customer—it’s about the impact you’re making. Tie every meeting to a clear goal or milestone. ✅ Evaluate qualitative value. After every meeting, reflect: Did this move the needle for my customer? Did I help solve a problem, provide clarity, or drive progress? If the answer is no, something needs to change. Things I've done or seen that I ❤️ are: ▶️ Post meeting CSATs for CSM engagement - Measure the effectiveness of the meeting ▶️ Asking the question, "Was this a good use of your time?" or "Did you find this meeting valuable?" ▶️ Analyzing the correlation between customer and engagement and lagging indicators like adoption, retention and growth ▶️ Pre-meeting alignment to avoid assumptions or misuse of time/resources - This is an issue with folks who have reoccurring meetings Stop meeting for the sake of meeting. But also identify if your customer doesn't want to meet with you because you're not brining value. Activity for the sake of activity isn’t Customer Success. Let’s measure what matters: progress, outcomes, and impact.