# Aggregate KPI for time and performance

I have a project KPI that I can measure daily: the use of a bottleneck resource, measured as the % against a target value of hours of use.

Example:

• Week_1
• day_1: 100%
• day_2: 95%
• day_3: 95%
• day_4: 95%
• day_5: 95%
• Week_2
• day_1: 100%
• day_2: 100%
• day_3: 100%
• day_4: 10%
• day_5: 10%

The goal for this KPI is to accomplish 100% of use on a daily basis.
Week_1 was not very successful (1/5) in terms of "complete accomplishment of 100% use", but each day was very close to the 100% goal.
Week_2 was somehow successful (3/5) in terms of "complete accomplishment of 100% use", but the bad days were very far from the goal.

Now I want to summarize the week with one single metric, and I want it to be fair and informative.

If the weekly summary metric is something like the number of days when the 100% goal was accomplished (1/5=20% and 3/5=60% in the previous examples), I don't know if it is fair, but it is not very informative.

If the weekly summary metric is the average of the daily scores (96% for Week_1 and 64% for Week_2 in the previous examples), it is probably not fair and not informative.

What would be the best way to build a metric to summarize the week?

• What exactly is this KPI supposed to measure? 100% of what? What is success? What's the point of the KPI at all if "success" is all-or-nothing? This isn't a math problem; it's a conceptual one! Commented May 12, 2020 at 21:36
• Thank you for the comment @ToddA.Jacobs. I have edited the question and I expect it to be more clear now. Commented May 12, 2020 at 23:10
• What's the ratio? What is "use" and how do you count it? Bottleneck resource and hours?? Define what you mean by this. Commented May 13, 2020 at 12:06
• If this is indeed a bottleneck resource, 100% utilization is probably a bad sign because it impedes the flow of work. Measuring total throughput (generated value) of the system and correlating that with utilization of this resource may generate more insights. Commented May 13, 2020 at 17:50
• I don't understand why only 100% means 'success' for you. If you used it 95%, that's a pretty efficient usage of the resource. I would even say that 95% might even be a lot better than 100%, as 100% probably meant there was more demand than you could supply, and 95% means you used almost all of the resource, without generating a bottleneck. Commented May 13, 2020 at 18:47