Weekly metrics for a COO need to satisfy two criteria: they need to be available in real or near-real time (not monthly reporting cycles), and they need to be leading indicators — signals that tell you where you’re heading, not just where you’ve been. Here are five that meet both criteria.
1. Delivery Predictability Rate
What percentage of work committed to in the current sprint or planning period is on track to be delivered as planned? Measure it weekly. A rate above 80% indicates a healthy planning and delivery process. A rate consistently below 60% indicates systemic overcommitment or estimation problems.
Track it by team, not just in aggregate — the team-level data tells you where the problem is.
2. Capacity Utilisation by Team
What percentage of each team’s available capacity is currently allocated to planned work? Track it at the team level. The target zone is 70–85%. Below 70% suggests underutilisation — possibly inefficiency, possibly strategic drift. Above 90% consistently suggests overloading — a risk to quality and sustainability.
3. Budget Burn Rate vs Plan
What is the current weekly or monthly spend rate against the plan? Is it tracking above or below the expected trajectory? A burn rate above plan is an early warning of overrun. A burn rate significantly below plan suggests delayed hiring, stalled projects, or scope reduction — each worth investigating.
4. Blocked Issues Count
How many issues, tasks, or projects are currently blocked — waiting on a dependency, a decision, or an external input? Rising blocked issue counts are an early signal of delivery risk. Consistently high blocked counts indicate systemic dependency management problems.
5. Team Health Signal
A simple weekly pulse — teams self-report red/amber/green on a single dimension: “Can your team deliver its commitments this week?” This is deliberately qualitative. It catches what the quantitative metrics miss: interpersonal conflicts, external disruptions, leadership confusion. A simple signal, taken weekly and taken seriously, is far more valuable than a quarterly engagement survey.
