\n Stay Forward <\/h2>\n
\n Get exclusive insights into digital
media's top-trending topics delivered
directly to your inbox. <\/p>\n <\/div>\n\n
\n
\n
On 19 October 2026, San Francisco 49ers quarterback Brock Purdy became the NFL’s all-time leader in career passer rating. His fifth pass against Washington took him past the 1,500 attempts needed to qualify, and he entered the record books at 105.6, almost three points clear of two-time MVP Lamar Jackson.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For the 49ers, this is good news. Passer rating is one of the most widely quoted measures of quarterback performance, and the team has built its offence around Purdy. If you sat on the board, a record like this is exactly the number you would want to see on the dashboard.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
His own coach may be less impressed by the statistic. Kyle Shanahan has called passer rating overrated. What he praises Purdy for is a willingness to do things that lower<\/em> his rating when they help the team: throwing the ball away rather than taking a sack, or, when the team is behind, attempting the risky pass that might be intercepted because the safe one won’t win the game. Purdy says much the same. He doesn’t finish games checking whether his rating cleared 100; he asks whether he did his job for his teammates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n That is the lesson for any organisation that sets KPIs. Purdy has the best passer rating in history partly because he isn’t playing for it. A quarterback judged and paid on passer rating alone would have every reason to play differently, and worse.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Passer rating combines completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown rate and interception rate. It is an accurate summary of passing outcomes. But it has two limitations that matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n First, it credits the quarterback with other people’s work. A perfectly placed pass can be dropped. A short throw can become a long gain through the receiver’s skill. Protection, play design and the opposition all move the number.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Second, it leaves things out. Sacks don’t count against it. A quarterback who holds the ball and takes a sack keeps his rating intact; one who throws it away to avoid the sack is charged with an incomplete pass. On this measure, the worse decision looks better.<\/p>\n\n\n\n None of this makes passer rating wrong. The calculation is correct. The trouble starts when an accurate number is asked a question it can’t answer, such as “who is the best quarterback?”, or when it becomes the thing a player is rewarded for.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Once a measure determines pay, promotion or budget, it stops being an observation and becomes an instruction. People will improve the number. Usually that means doing the job better. Sometimes it means finding a cheaper route to the number, and the cheaper route usually runs through whatever the measure can’t see.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This happens at every level of a business:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In each case nobody has been dishonest. They have done what the measure asked of them. The failure lies in the choice of KPI, not in the people pursuing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n KPIs often earn their place because they are familiar, easy to report or standard across an industry. Those are practical advantages, but they don’t establish whether a measure suits a particular decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Monitoring the health of the business, diagnosing a problem, evaluating an initiative and assessing someone’s performance are different purposes. Revenue is essential to the first and almost useless on its own for the last. Before choosing a KPI, decide what you want to understand and what action the answer will inform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It also helps to separate observing<\/em> an outcome from attributing<\/em> it. Profit, revenue and retention have many causes. That breadth makes them valuable indicators of how the business is doing, and unreliable verdicts on any single team. A sales team can perform well while revenue falls because supply constraints stop orders being fulfilled.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Performance measures should reflect the contribution a person or team is expected to make. That doesn’t mean measuring people only on what they fully control; shared commercial goals stop departments hitting their targets while the business misses its own. It means being explicit about how each team’s work connects to the result.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One test is worth applying to any KPI before it is attached to a target: if someone improved this number without improving the business, how would they do it?<\/em> If the answer comes easily, the measure needs a counterweight.<\/p>\nAn accurate number can still point the wrong way<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
When a KPI becomes the job<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Start with the question, not the available number<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Match the measure to the responsibility<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n