Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Does your workplace have targets where the target becomes more important than the thing it was meant to measure?

36 replies

Chesterk · 06/08/2026 12:50

NHS waiting lists.

Schools where being present when the register is called is given priority over missing lesson time if a pupil has a medical appointment for example.

I worked for a consultancy where internal cost structures meant it could be cheaper to outsource work to other companies (luckily it often just took a quick chat with a department head to show how ridiculous this was and to keep the work inhouse, so maybe not the best example).

I never had understood the logic behind a department being penalised if they didn’t use all their budget (not my company).

OP posts:
Any1ForTennis · 06/08/2026 23:44

Yes, Public Sector and a target to maximise % income collected against invoices raised.

Ends up being manipulated by not doing refunds in the last quarter unless requested by vendor and counting the credits towards income collected despite knowing the whole lot will be paid back out again come April 🙄. New invoices not issued in run up to year end to minimise the debit.

It really irritates me!

Walkacrossthesand · 07/08/2026 08:23

@IWasTangoed indeed - I have long asserted that, whenever targets are set, organisations switch focus to achieving the targets, to the detriment of other, less easily measured, aspects of their core business. Quality is hard to measure and therefore usually isn’t.

RowsOfFlowers · 07/08/2026 08:24

Yup, therapy caseloads. They care more about how many clients you’ve seen compared to recovery and quality of care.

StrictlyAFemaleFemale · 07/08/2026 08:27

Thankfully the law has been changed to give us more freedom. We have fewer targets and more ways of meeting them, which means we can do a lot more to help our clients.

JimsBeam · 07/08/2026 11:25

RowsOfFlowers · 07/08/2026 08:24

Yup, therapy caseloads. They care more about how many clients you’ve seen compared to recovery and quality of care.

Charity whose name is three words beginning with a C by any chance?

LoveItaly · 07/08/2026 11:45

wherearemypeople · 06/08/2026 23:08

Utter madness - we should all write to the health minister about this. It's costing our money and our health.

This is the kind of lunacy that most people don’t realise is going on, when they talk about the NHS being underfunded. Utter madness as you say. My mother has said that UK institutions have had terrible management for as long as she’s been alive, and she’s in her 90’s now. I wonder if other countries are as bad?

RowsOfFlowers · 07/08/2026 15:21

JimsBeam · 07/08/2026 11:25

Charity whose name is three words beginning with a C by any chance?

No actually, private healthcare sector x

Pedallleur · 07/08/2026 17:14

I was in IT at a University. Case came in and the aim by management was to close it quickly. Graded P1 to P5 so P1 was end of days ie No WiFi/internet/Office but no one used P1 as it would mean questions so P2 was the worst case. User had IT issue but on holiday/ill? Close the case. User didn't reply to a case note? Close it. User has account issues so can't reply? Close the case. Student help desk too busy? Close it don't put more staff on it. No one from the management wanted to know the issues. They were in meetings or WFH. But many of you have lived this dream

Chesterk · 07/08/2026 18:23

IWasTangoed · 06/08/2026 23:38

I briefly worked for a govt funded employment agency to support people on benefits back to work. We had targets for how many people we got into work per month. If you didn't hit your target for the month, you immediately went on a support programme which could ultimately lead to you losing your job.

Well, the inevitable happened where some employment agents set up links with companies to hire clients on a temporary basis, so that they could hit their targets, without telling the clients they were hired short term. It meant the agent hit their target each month, meanwhile the clients (often vulnerable people) found themselves unemployed and back on benefits a few months later after being let go by the company.

Totally immoral behaviour which still makes me angry when I think about it. I left very soon after starting there.

That’s very disturbing.

OP posts:
FinchiePink · 07/08/2026 18:29

TheRealMagic · 06/08/2026 12:59

Where I work the internal accounting system means that departments put time and energy into competing over who gets to deliver something because then it is their income, but it makes absolutely no difference to the institution as a whole in terms of income. It wastes time, means often two departments are doing the same thing which is duplicated effort (but neither will give up doing it because from their point of view they've then lost income) but also means that the often actually best solution of them working together to deliver it is almost never done.

Ugh, this. I actually left a firm over it.

So busy chasing budgets and finance targets they didn't realise they were haemorrhaging clients (client service of course was compromised in order to keep WIP low) and good staff (because we're professional advisors, not salesmen).

Commerciality is important. But if it's the only thing you focus on you'll have no business left.

TiredAndUseless1493 · 07/08/2026 18:44

Similar to a PP, not me but my DH worked for a company that prioritised time spent on the phone over actual customer issues resolved. DH was very good at his job and knew the company policies inside out, so was very efficient. This led to him getting a prize for the best/most positive customer feedback in the same meeting as he got put on a PDP for not spending long enough on the phone.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread