10. Metrics that Matter

People first, always, but don't ignore the data.

This is a manifesto, in the same vein as Jerry McGuire’s “The Things We Think and Do Not Say,” in which Tom Cruise’s character Jerry McGuire writes a 25‑page manifesto in a manic‑fueled night of writing. His goal was to call the agency back to the roots of the relationship within the industry of Sports Agent/Management—to get back to the personalized touch and care for the individual over the dollars that could be made off of their performance. In his words, from the movie, Jerry McGuire:

We are losing our battle with all that is personal and real about our business. Every day I can look at a list of phone calls only partially returned. Driving home, I think of what was not accomplished, instead of what was accomplished. The gnawing feeling continues. That families are sitting waiting for a call from us, waiting to hear the word on a contract, or a General Manager’s thoughts on an upcoming season. We are pushing numbers around, doing our best, but is there any real satisfaction in success without pride? Is there any real satisfaction in a success that exists only when we push the messiness of real human contact from our lives and minds? When we learn not to care enough about the very guy we promised the world to, just to get him to sign. Or to let it bother us that a hockey player’s son is worried about his dad getting that fifth concussion.[^1]

The dark side of metrics, of analysis, of statistics, is that we abstract ourselves from what matters for the holistic success of the business (not just the revenue success). This entire manifesto on Product is written from the starting point of belonging—of people first, always—towards a posture in which we build for people, and not for metrics.

I’m not writing from the position of a CEO or CFO, who has to ensure the revenue outpaces the expenses. I’m writing from the seat of a builder, who has to build a product people will use, not because we’ve installed dark patterns and addiction triggers to trick the user towards engagement, purchases, and consumption. To build for people is to build engagement by giving the user what they need or want, whether that be access, belonging, or value. We can still be capitalists and build for belonging. We don’t have to turn our backs on getting the conversion, increasing the engagement, or increasing the profit within the transaction. And I’m not advocating for a naïve retreat into some romanticized, hyper‑local craft economy—where regional trade replaces the global supply chain, and every transaction is wrapped in nostalgia for a time that never fully existed.

What I am advocating for is a refusal to confuse growth with goodness, or gross revenue with real value[^2].

Metrics come to us not from accounting, but from economics. Accounting is how we balance the table; economics is how we explain the imbalance—through strategy, through story, and manipulation when it suits us. Everyone in my Master’s of Business Administration class at the University of Oklahoma had to read the book How to Lie with Statistics. Some of us learned what not to do, and others applied the lessons in a more selfish direction. And that’s the rub.

Metrics can be great, but they can also feed a presentation theatre in which the real truth of the data is hidden away in the spreadsheet, and graphs only show what we want them to show. A notorious example of this can be seen in pitch decks, board presentations, and quarterly earnings calls across multiple industries, that being the Cost of Acquisition (CAC), in which we present the number of new accounts and the cost to acquire them. This metric in and of itself is a wonderful metric, yet it masks the real story. In only showing the CAC, we hide the holistic metric from the stakeholders—that is, the retention rate and its sister metric, the attrition rate.

When I title this chapter Metrics that Matter, what I want to show is transparency in the data, so that we are making decisions that matter. To show CAC and not show Retention or Attrition rate beside it is to manipulate the data to tell a positive story of growth, without turning the page to see how the story ends.

If we have a CAC that everyone is happy with and a low attrition rate, this is really good news. If we have a high CAC and a high retention rate, this can also be good, depending on the historical cost and the lifetime value of the customer (LTV). CAC and retention/attrition have to be presented together to really make sense of the data being shown. The temptation is to tell only the good part of the story—our marketing plan is working—look at how many new accounts have been created over the past quarter due to our discounting program or cash back program. Yes, we spent a bit more than normal for these customers, but that is okay, because now they are in our system.

Another metric to be wary of is the Number of Accounts created, without the number of monthly active users (users who have logged in over the last 30 days). We can espouse an incredible number of accounts, but if our active accounts are less than 20 % of that large number, the Number of Accounts in the system is irrelevant when nobody is logging into the app.

One of the apps I helped create, The Bible App, is well known for just presenting the number of unique installs, clicking upwards towards 1 billion on the homepage of their website. It’s an impressive marketing ploy, one that I’ve used strategically in the past to flex my contribution to such a successful app! But as I’ve already established, it is a hard number to reconcile with reality, as we don’t know the active users, the cost of acquisition, or the retention/attrition rate on those installs. Having close to 1 billion installs is rather exciting news, a blurb that the common user wouldn’t realize is for show, and not the realistic number showing actual engagement.

And therein lies the problem.

We are replacing metrics that matter with metrics for marketing.

In a short period of time, YouVersion will have one amazing story to tell: by crossing the 1 billion App Installs marker, they will have joined an elite club of apps, as only 86 apps can brag this metric[^3]. And who could blame the marketing team for jumping on this number, as YouVersion would join apps like WhatsApp, TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, Snapchat, CapCut, Telegram, Spotify, YouTube, Netflix, UC Browser, Zoom, Amazon Shopping, Pinterest, and others that sit comfortably in the billion‑install club.

Metrics for Marketing

Metrics for marketing are not metrics for measurement. Maybe this perspective will help us understand the role of metrics as it relates to selling the systems, processes, or products that create revenue for your company.

If the marketing team walks the line between misleading and over‑representing the truth to sell your widget, should we as a product team care?

First, we must admit, we, more than any other team, may be biased toward authenticity and nuance, especially as it relates to our product offering. This bias helps us build the best product we can with the data we have and the gut instinct we’ve evolved into over time. We care, maybe too deeply, about truth in advertising, because it is our product that the consumer will download and use for the purpose it was marketed.

We don’t want them to be surprised, disappointed, discouraged, or frustrated with the experience. We can’t handle the bait‑and‑switch marketing tactics that promise things on our roadmap, which have not yet been implemented into our product. The friction or tension between marketing and product can be healthy or toxic, and it all depends on the relationship between the two. The reason for the tension is based on the criteria each department’s incentive plan is built upon.

Traditionally, Marketing is responsible for the top of the funnel, which includes brand awareness and the tactics to pull attention towards the start of the acquisition process.

An engagement funnel might look like this[^4]:

(diagram description omitted)

In this diagram, we see the progression of acquisition towards engagement, with ad impressions and clicks leading to downloads. From downloads, we see a general abandonment, then account creation, followed by attrition as the core customer establishes engagement (measured by several context‑specific user actions within the app). Without going into too much detail, you can see by the graph that there is a shared responsibility of acquisition, which takes me back to the previous point that the Marketing team is more responsible for the top of the funnel and less responsible for the bottom of the funnel. In healthy organizations, both teams have an ownership in the entire customer journey, and while there is an accountability to your zone, the responsibility to keep users engaged is holistic (owned by all).

This means Product should be working with Marketing to develop assets to utilize in product marketing content, and Marketing should be collaborative in the content creation process, so as to not create a huge disparity between what the app says it does and what it does.

There are a few brands out there that have set a high bar in how they market themselves (the brand), their products (their apps), and their cultural fit (the vibe). And some tricks to doing this well are for the Product Design team to create product feature exaggerations. What do I mean? There are times when the product is visually complex, which fits within the context of use, but is not beneficial in the selling of the feature. Bluntly, complexity is distracting in advertising. Product teams can help Marketing by spending some time creating abstractions or exaggerations of the features being advertised. I would caution that two layers of abstraction or exaggeration are about the limit. An example might show a full run detail page with all its complexity and, next to it, a simplified or stylized representation that conveys the essence of the feature without overwhelming the viewer. This philosophy—abstracting or exaggerating features for marketing—helps keep advertisements clear and compelling without lying about the underlying capability.

On the left, you might see the full run detail page within an app, and on the right, an abstracted view of that page for marketing use. The use of abstractions and exaggerations from a product marketing perspective moves us past the literal truth but still holds us accountable to the intended truth.

Metrics That Pair Well

Just as features can be abstracted, metrics should be contextualized. Reporting one number without its counterpart is a manipulation. Here are some other pairs of metrics that should be viewed together rather than alone:

Just Enough Metrics

We could spend countless pages documenting the formulas and metrics used by marketing, product, customer support, and sales teams for their reporting and analysis. But I don’t want to waste our time with rote formulaic measurements.

I want to inspire you to ignore these metrics as much as you possibly can, to get to the point in your career where you utilize just enough metrics to inform the decisions you will make as a leader.

Just to be clear. I believe in data. I believe in monthly metrics. I believe in OKRs, KPIs, A/B tests, and all the analytics we use to guide decision‑making. But I also believe in gut and instinct, story and soul, where the best products are made at the intersection of inputs, including operational data, revenue data, customer support data, app analytics, competitive analysis, business strategy, and potential future trends. It is in the intersection of all of these inputs that the work is done. When we intuitively know the inputs, we can then build the right feature, in the right product, in the right place, at the right time, and for the right people.

Data, metrics, and analysis, like our other inputs, are magnets influencing our compass. It can point us in a direction, but it does not tell us where the mountains are, what the air feels like, or how good the view will be when we get there. Numbers cannot account for the lived experience of a user, the cultural moment they are in, or the way a product makes them feel.

When companies rely on data as a sole input in their decision‑making, they begin optimizing for the wrong things, chasing the truth found in their metrics instead of following the intent of their mission. They may ship features that move the needle but risk killing the magic that drove performance in the first place. We have to remember that behind every click, scroll, like, and purchase is a human being, and we humans make decisions with our hearts as much as our heads; not all of us are accountants or mathematicians, where everything balances out and the answer is neatly formulaic.

If anything, analytics and reporting should spark questions and increase dialogue. The best use of analytics is to spur Executives to ask the question, Why?

Analytics and reporting should always be paired with human insight and direct customer feedback. In listening to our users and by watching them interact with what we have built, we can document the feelings they are feeling.

When we build for people, our goal is to create something people need or love—to make something that earns a place in their lives and brings value to their everyday.

Which means knowing when to follow the data and when to follow the story.

So yes, measure acquisition, engagement, and conversion. Run the tests. Study the dashboards, but also get outside, sit in the backseat while the driver tries to navigate the touch screen outside their window. Talk to your partner, who is more than likely a great sit‑in for your regular customer. And if they are anything like my wife, they will readily break what you thought was an ironclad solution or wander off the rails in what you thought was an easily navigable user flow.

“The consumer is not a moron. She is your wife. Don’t insult her intelligence.”
—David Ogilvy, The Confessions of an Advertising Man

Live in the product yourself, be the number two tester of order‑ahead at Sonic Drive‑In (second only to your Head of Product Design), and maybe find a way to offload the onion rings and tater tots so as to not impact your waistline too much.

In the pursuit of optimization and monetization, try your hardest not to remove the soul from what you are building.

Because in the end, it is not the metrics that keep people coming back, it is how you make them feel in the moment of conversion. Delight them and leave them with an increased sense of belonging.

If you build for people, the metrics will follow.

[^1]: Jerry McGuire’s “Mission Statement”, from the movie Jerry McGuire, see the full written mission statement written by Cameron Crowe at http://www.theuncool.com/films/jerry-maguire/jerrys-mission-statement/.

[^2]: A bit of a sidenote:

We are on an unhealthy economic path. Resources are constrained or pooled up in high places; the economy we are competing within is not some infinite expansion of opportunity. The American Dream has been diluted into a consolidation of opportunity into fewer and fewer hands, a narrowing of possibility disguised as progress. We are watching capitalism harden into its late-stage forms. A type of corporate feudalism, where our economic lives are lived within a few mega‑platforms. Or potentially a neo‑corporate position, where state and corporate powers weave so tightly together that competition becomes an orchestration of planned events—systems that preserve the illusion of choice while extracting from us in every interaction.

If you want examples of how our current late-stage capitalism is eroding into corporate feudalism, you don’t have to look far. State politics is thick with the fingerprints of corporate lobbyists shaping local priorities. The 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission opened the gates for corporate‑enabled PACs to dominate election spending and influence, cementing a political economy where private capital speaks louder than public will. Even AI’s emerging interplay with our government reveals the same gravitational pull: a willingness to sidestep or erase copyright protections in service of corporate training models. Or consider the current administration’s embrace of cryptocurrency, not only in political rhetoric but in the accumulation of wealth by the family’s corporation, which again is an early step toward a neo‑corporatism where state and corporate interests merge, and the government itself becomes investor, shareholder, or silent partner in the venture of monetization.

We could also imagine another trajectory, opposite the one above, in which some catalytic moment forces a turn toward something more decentralized, commons‑based, and cooperative. Maybe this shift is gradual, born of national idealism and a remembrance of our own origin stories—resistance to empire, the tea party, the idea that markets are meant to serve the people. Or maybe it arrives by catastrophe, by war, or an AI takeover that dismantles the market altogether. In such a post‑capitalist environment, small‑market economies, trade and barter systems, and the collapse of a global monetary order could initiate the rise of cooperative networks and a re‑emergence of the rule of the commons.

Okay, this is about as deep as I want to wade into political and economic waters—just far enough to show the larger storylines that rarely make contact with everyday American life. I go there because when we discuss metrics, we also need to discuss motivations, context, and that decisions are normally made by who holds the bag—that is, who holds the gold.

[^3]: AndroidAuthority.com, as of May 2024: https://www.androidauthority.com/billion-install-club-installed-apps-739754.

[^4]: Here are a few other Acquisition funnel diagrams for e-commerce and FinTech.