Performance Measurement Systems

EV #batteries in the real world last nearly 40% longer than in lab tests. While new batteries continue to improve, there is now mounting evidence that EV batteries on the roads are exceeding expectations. This lowers the total cost of ownership for EV owners and also benefits the environment by getting more use out of each battery. How is this possible? In standard lab testing, the battery is subjected to rapidly repeated charge-discharge cycles using a constant rate of discharge. This is then used to estimate battery degradation rates. However, discharging power at a constant rate is not really how we drive. We might accelerate hard to get onto the freeway or be in stop-start traffic. And the battery is also not used for much of the time. In recent research from Stanford, 92 EV batteries were tested with different discharge patterns of a period of two years. The results? Batteries tested using real life scenarios degraded significantly slower than expected and had higher life expectancy than those tested under lab conditions. Even better, the more realistic the battery use, the slower the battery degraded. Also of note was that for personal use, the degradation associated with time had more of an impact than the degradation from charging and discharging. Other studies have found similar results, including one last year from GEOTAB using remote monitoring of data from 10,000 EVs. It found that improved battery technology is leading to slower degradation - around 1.8% per year, compared to 2.3% per year in 2019. With CATL announcing a new EV battery pack with a 1.5 million kilometre warranty last year, we're at the stage where the battery will outlast the vehicle. Link to story from The Driven is below. #energy #sustainability #automotive #emobility #energytransition

100 percent on KPIs .....0% bonus 😭😭😭 The misalignment noone talks about !!! Last week, I sat with a frustrated CEO who said something that every leader should pay attention to… “My managers are all scoring 100% on their KPIs… but the business is scoring 0% on its strategy targets.” He wasn’t exaggerating. When we opened their performance files, every manager had neat, well-completed KPIs all pulled straight from their job descriptions. ✔️ “Prepare monthly reports” ✔️ “Attend weekly meetings” ✔️ “Supervise the team” ✔️ “Submit budgets” ✔️ “Manage stakeholder relationships” All ticked. All done. All… irrelevant to the company’s actual strategy. Because here’s the twist: Their bonus wasn’t linked to job descriptions. It was linked to strategy. And the strategy said: ❌ Grow revenue by 50% ❌ Reduce cost-to-serve by 10% ❌ Improve turnaround time by 5% ❌ Expand two new markets ❌ Digitise three processes None of that was in anyone’s KPIs. Not one person was actively carrying the strategy on their shoulders. Everyone was performing… but no one was delivering. So the company had: A team that scored 100% A business that scored 0% And a bonus pool that had nothing to pay out And suddenly the tension made sense. When KPIs come from job descriptions, you get activity. When KPIs come from strategy, you get results. That day, the CEO looked at me and said: “We don’t have a performance problem. We have an alignment problem.” And that’s the truth in many organisations today. People are working hard , very hard , but not always on the things that shift the business forward. 👉 If you want accountability, align KPIs to strategy. 👉 If you want growth, cascade the strategy into every role. 👉 If you want bonuses to make sense, measure what matters. Because nothing is more painful than a team doing their best… on the wrong things. #leadership #strategy Winfield Strategy & Innovation - Winfield Business School

OKRs are destinations. KPIs are your map.  Ignore either and you won't scale.  No great business was ever built on guesswork and opinions. You need systems that tell you where you need to go,  And whether you're actually getting there. Two of those systems are OKRs and KPIs, respectively. The difference between a 7-figure exit and an 8-figure one is a founder who uses both correctly. Here's everything you need to know to approach them correctly: Objective Key Results (OKRs) A system for setting direction.  OKRs define what success looks like. What They’re Great For: - Setting ambitious growth goals. - Aligning teams around one clear outcome. - Turning long-term strategy into short-term action. When to Use Them: - You’re scaling quickly and need focus. - You want your team rowing in the same direction. - You’re setting quarterly or annual priorities. Questions To Ask: Which single result would make the biggest impact today? Are our goals stretching, or just safe? Can every team member explain what success looks like? End Goal: Everyone knows the mission, the milestones, and the measurement. KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) Metrics that indicate if your systems are healthy, efficient, and improving. Without them, you’re guessing where things are breaking. What They’re Great For: - Monitoring business health. - Keeping performance consistent. - Highlighting problems early. When To Use Them: - You want to measure stability, not just growth. - You’re tracking ongoing performance. - You’re managing teams or systems that run continuously. Questions To Ask: Which metrics prove we’re on track? What early indicators warn us when something’s off? Are we measuring progress or just activity? End Goal: Visibility and consistency. You can’t improve what you don’t measure. TL;DR: OKRs tell you where your business is headed. KPIs tell you if you're on the right path. If you don't understand the difference,  You'll be trying to reach a destination without a map.  Are you setting/tracking both KPIs and OKRs?  Drop a comment below. I break down frameworks like this every week in my newsletter, Step By Step. Join 200k+ founders learning how to build better businesses https://lnkd.in/eUTCQTWb ♻️ Repost to help founders in your network scale smarter.  And follow Chris Donnelly for more on building and scaling.

A bold prediction no one wants to hear: Half of all commercial solar systems installed before 2016 will be underperforming or non-operational by 2030. The solar industry is obsessed with the future. Cutting-edge panels (bigger is better). Sleek batteries. Dazzling projections for new installs. But here's the reality we can't afford to ignore: a silent crisis unfolding on rooftops across America—a crisis I've been tackling firsthand since 2012, traveling the country with SunPower to address some of the industry’s most pressing system failures. Across the country, tens of thousands of rooftop solar systems—once hailed as the clean energy revolution—are quietly decaying. Not because the technology failed, but because the industry did. We rushed to install. We cut corners. We promised 25 years of performance… and delivered systems that can’t make it past 10. Here’s what’s killing them: Inverters are dying—many are already out of warranty, with no replacements available. Wiring and electrical infrastructure that was never designed for 25+ years of exposure. Install quality? Forget it—an army of barely trained crews built the boom, and now we’re paying the price. Maintenance? There was no plan. Just a contract, a handshake, and a hope it would all work out. This is not just an engineering issue—it's a financial one. Underperforming assets are generating less revenue than forecasted, while increasing the risk of electrical faults, fire hazards, and insurance claims. And here's the kicker: almost no one is ready to deal with this wave of system failures. Asset managers, facility owners, and even EPCs are discovering that repowering, remediation, or decommissioning is far more complex and expensive than expected. This is where the next frontier of solar energy lies—not in installing the next 100GW—it’s rescuing the first 100GW. Revitalization. Repowering. Responsible end-of-life planning. The question isn’t whether it’s coming. It’s whether we have the guts to face it. Are we going to keep pitching the dream— —or finally clean up the mess we left behind?

Are You Truly Measuring Energy Savings Scientifically? In any ISO 50001-compliant Energy Management System (EnMS), Establishing an Energy Baseline (EnB) and selecting Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) are the absolute foundation. Without them, you cannot reliably prove energy savings or demonstrate continuous improvement. Let us see clear breakdown of these critical steps: 🔹 1. Establishing the Energy Baseline (EnB) The EnB is your quantitative reference point: "How much energy would we have used today if no improvements had been made?" Data Collection: Gather at least 12 months of historical data (energy consumption + relevant variables like production volume, degree days) to capture seasonality. Normalization: Avoid simple static baselines (e.g., last year’s total). Identify and account for key drivers (weather, output levels) that significantly affect consumption. Regression Analysis (Best Practice): Use linear or multivariable regression to build a model (e.g., y = mx + c). This lets you calculate expected vs. actual energy use under current conditions. 🔹 2. Selecting Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) EnPIs should be hierarchical — from facility-wide down to specific equipment ,and focus on efficiency, not just total consumption. A. High-Level (Facility-Wide) Energy Use Intensity (EUI): Total energy ÷ floor area (kWh/m²/yr) — ideal for buildings. Energy Intensity (EI): Total energy ÷ production output (e.g., kWh/unit) , standard in manufacturing. B. System & Equipment Level (Significant Energy Users) Chillers: kW/ton or COP Boilers: Combustion efficiency (%) or steam intensity Compressed Air: Specific power (kW/100 cfm) C. Productivity Metrics Link energy to value: kWh/kg of product or energy cost per unit sold. The Process in a Nutshell Identify Significant Energy Users (SEUs) Determine key driving variables Build the EnB using regression on historical data Choose EnPIs that track true efficiency Getting these steps right turns energy management from guesswork into data-driven success. And a final question for energy managers, sustainability leaders, and facility engineers: what has your experience been with baselines and EnPIs? Have you encountered common pitfalls, or found go‑to tools, for regression analysis? If you have a question, insight, or story to share, feel free to comment. #EnergyManagement #ISO50001 #EnergyEfficiency #Sustainability #EnMS #EnergyPerformance #NetZero

Tough Talk Tuesday? If your company says Customer Success is strategic but still treats it like a support function, stop pretending. If your CS team is occupied mainly with “check-in” meetings and renewal prep instead of driving outcomes, stop pretending. If your leaders talk about trust and value but can’t show how CS moves the business forward, stop pretending. Customer Success is not a concierge desk. It is not a feel-good function. It is a growth engine. And it needs to be treated like one. That means: • CSMs who understand the customer’s business better than Sales or Product • Success plans tied to business outcomes, not playbooks • Metrics that reflect value delivered, not just effort made • A culture where CS earns its seat at the revenue table by showing up with data, direction, and urgency We are not here to smooth things over. We are here to move things forward. Five steps to start shifting from support to strategic: 🔢 1. Replace activity metrics with outcome metrics Track customer impact, not just engagement frequency and volume. Stop counting touchpoints and start measuring progress. 🔢 2. Know the customer’s business priorities by heart Treat every EBR and senior executive session like a board meeting. Tie your updates to what your customer’s CEO and CFO care about. 🔢 3. Stop asking “How can I help?” and start saying “Here is what we should do next.” Lead. Recommend. Own the play. 🔢 4. Align CS goals with company goals Revenue, retention, margin, influence - whatever matters to the business should matter to your CS team. 🔢 5. Tell the story of value loudly and often One story, once a week. Share a real example of customer success inside your company until others start doing it for you. The future of Customer Success belongs to those who stop waiting to be seen as strategic and start behaving like it. What is one move your CS team could make this week that shifts how you are seen? #CreatingTheFuture #CustomerSuccess #Leadership #Growth #ClientValue #DISQO

Are you measuring what matters in your organization? A comprehensive measure of organizational effectiveness includes much more than profit margins and growth rates. The market and media often celebrate companies that show rapid financial growth or high profitability, leading to a cultural bias towards these metrics as signs of success BUT the tide is slowly turning- more businesses are recognizing the long-term value of a holistic approach to effectiveness and success. Many more businesses are embracing the concept of the "Triple Bottom Line," which measures success not just by financial profit ("Profit"), but also by the company's impact on people ("People") and the planet ("Planet"). HOWEVER 🚨 There is more work to be done! The prioritization of non-financial elements of organizational success can get pushed aside when financial pressures hit or quick results are valued. You have probably heard the phrase "What gets measured gets managed". This is generally true. Quantifying and measuring non-financial aspects of effectiveness, such as employee well-being, social impact, and workplace culture, is hugely important but remains challenging. 💡 Here's some straightforward steps to move you towards a more holistic approach to measuring success: 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐠𝐨𝐚𝐥𝐬: Define what holistic success means for your organization. This could include specific targets related to employee well-being, social impact, and environmental sustainability. 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐡𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬: Talk to employees, customers, and community members to understand what aspects of your business matter most to them. Their insights can help shape your holistic success framework. 𝐂𝐡𝐨𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐦𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐬: Based on your goals and stakeholder feedback, pick metrics that are meaningful and manageable. For example, employee satisfaction can be measured through regular surveys, while environmental impact can be tracked through energy consumption or waste reduction metrics. 𝐔𝐬𝐞 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬: Look into established frameworks (like GRI or B Corp standards for sustainability; Gallups Q12 Engagement Survey for employee engagement or the Denison Organizational Culture Model to measure workplace culture). There are existing frameworks for most known elements of organizational effectiveness so it's just a matter of looking into them. 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧-𝐦𝐚𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠: Ensure that these holistic metrics are part of regular business reviews and decision-making processes, not just side projects. 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐥𝐲: Share your progress openly, including both successes and areas for improvement. Transparency builds trust and credibility. 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠: Be prepared to adapt and refine your approach as you learn what works and what doesn't. This is a journey, not a one-time task. #organizationaleffectiveness #measurewhatmatters #leaders

In Q1 2025, LTI (Ongoing Equity) Programs Had 4x the “Pay for Performance” Differentiation for Promoted Employees Vs. Salary Raises Companies generally reward top performers through three types of compensation programs: [A] Salary Raises [B] Long Term Incentives (LTI)–often ongoing equity grants [C] Short Term Incentives (STI)–often called a bonus program Today, let’s compare how much differentiation there is across the market for top performers between [A] and [B]. ________________ 𝗠𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗱𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆: We recently took a look at Q1 2025 merit cycle data across 46k+ employees from Pave's dataset. 1st, our data science team grouped and analyzed employees across four groups:  • [1] Promoted  • [2] Above expectations (no promo)  • [3] Meets Expectations or equivalent (no promo)  • [4] Below Expectations (no promo) 2nd, our data science team looked at two dimensions across salary and ongoing equity grants  • [1] What % of employees received a compensation update?  • [2] For those who received, what was the size of the increase? Note that for equity, this was measured by the % increase in net equity value compensation vesting over the next 12 months 3rd, our data science team multiplied “participation” with “amount” to find the “𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲” as a method of measuring pay for performance. ________________ The Results: ✅ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗱  => Salary: +9.7% expected value increase => Ongoing Equity: +38.6% expected value increase ✅ 𝗔𝗯𝗼𝘃𝗲 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 (𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼)  => Salary: +4.5% => Ongoing Equity: +11.0% ✅ 𝗠𝗲𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗼𝗿 𝗘𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘃𝗮𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘁 (𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼)  => Salary: +3.1% => Ongoing Equity: +3.8% ✅ 𝗕𝗲𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 (𝗡𝗼 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼)  => Salary: +0.3% => Ongoing Equity: +0.0% expected value increase ________________ 𝗠𝘆 𝗧𝗮𝗸𝗲𝗮𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀: 1️⃣ 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗮 𝗺𝗲𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘃𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝟯𝟴.𝟲% “𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲” 𝘃𝘀 𝗮 𝟵.𝟳% 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲. This means that for promoted employees, the equity comp is ~4x as outsized from a pay for performance standpoint. 2️⃣ 𝗠𝗲𝗮𝗻𝘄𝗵𝗶𝗹𝗲, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 “𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀” (𝟯.𝟴%) 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝘂𝗰𝗵 𝗰𝗹𝗼𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗿𝗮𝗶𝘀𝗲𝘀 (𝟯.𝟭%) 𝗳𝗼𝗿 “𝗺𝗲𝗲𝘁 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀” 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗲𝘀. This suggests that the real LTI/ongoing equity comp differentiation is happening for top performers (both those in the “promoted” and “above expectations (no promo)” buckets. ________________ 𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗦𝘂𝗴𝗴𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 & 𝗛𝗥 𝗟𝗲𝗮𝗱𝗲𝗿𝘀: Analyze your company’s “expected value” salary and equity raise amounts. How do your outcomes compare to the Q1 2025 benchmarks from this post? And where + how should you consider tweaking your "recommendation logic” to guide your company towards more or less merit cycle differentiation for different cohorts of employees?

The site manager saw a clean installation. I saw a potential €2.4 million loss. I was recently invited to visit a PV plant in Germany. At first glance, it looked excellent. Clean layout. Tidy execution. Everything “by the book”. But when you zoom in, details start to matter. For example: MC4 connectors resting directly on the aluminium frame. DC cables fixed with metal clips between modules. From an execution point of view, this often looks acceptable. From an experienced O&M perspective, this is where alarm bells start ringing. Why? Because over time, these details create micro-environments: - direct contact with cold aluminium - reduced drying - condensation cycles - capillary effects at seals - different thermal expansion of materials Not a failure on day one. Not something SCADA will flag. But a slow, cumulative degradation over years. That’s a classic 𝗦𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗬𝗶𝗲𝗹𝗱 𝗞𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗿. Not one big mistake. But thousands of small execution decisions, repeated across an entire asset. Let’s put numbers on it. A 100 MWp PV plant in Germany. ~100 GWh annual production. ~€60/MWh PPA. That’s roughly €6 million revenue per year. A long-term underperformance of just 0.5 - 2.0 % means €30,000 to €120,000 per year. From year 10 to year 30, that adds up to: -> ~€0.6 to €2.4 million of value leakage. And this is a simplified estimate, before you even consider market effects (capture prices, curtailment, negative hours), which can materially shift the € impact. This is why execution quality is not a site topic. It’s a portfolio and valuation topic. I’m curious how others see this in practice: - Would you accept MC4 connectors resting on the frame? - Metal clips on DC cables? - Or do you enforce free-hanging connectors as a standard? Where do you draw the line, and why? #AndreasBach #Renewables #SilentYieldKiller

Many people assume solar PV degrades quickly — but long-term evidence suggests otherwise. This paper in EES Solar analyses photovoltaic systems operating for more than two decades across different climates and material configurations. - Based on rare long-term empirical data, the findings suggest that PV modules can retain a high share of their initial performance even after 30 years of operation, with degradation rates lower than often assumed. - This matters for energy policy and system planning. Assumptions about asset lifetimes and degradation feed directly into cost projections, investment decisions, and decarbonisation pathways. - Evidence that PV systems may last longer and perform more reliably than expected strengthens the case for rapid scale-up of solar as a core pillar of the energy transition. - The paper also highlights the importance of quality standards, system design, and operating conditions — reminders that policy frameworks should focus not only on deployment volumes, but also on long-term performance and sustainability. Link to paper in comments.