Are Your KPIs Actually Measuring Performance? Or Compliance?

For years, performance measurement has been pretty straightforward: set targets, track progress, reward completion. That model worked when work was predictable and roles were stable.

But that world is gone. And its time for our KPIs to catch up.

As AI takes on more routine tasks, too many organizations are still rewarding completion and output volume: employees check boxes instead of actually applying the uniquely human traits machines can’t replicate, like judgment, analytical thinking, curiosity, and leadership.

It’s no wonder people are “checking out”: even as the nature of work increasingly demands continuous learning, experimentation, and adaptability, those aren’t being measured, recognized or rewarded.

AI isn’t just “changing jobs.” It’s reshaping what good work looks like, automating routine tasks while pushing humans toward higher-order problem solving, creative analysis, and better decision-making–capabilities we depend on.

But do your KPIs reflect this new reality?

We’re Rewarding the Wrong Signals

A recent think tank, “The L&D Shift: From Support Function to Strategic Integrator,” brought together L&D leaders from global enterprises, including Donaldson, Equifax, AWS, Thrivent, Andersen, Gap Inc. and more. The discussion surfaced a theme:

Instead of completion-based KPIs that look back at what has been done, we need forward-looking KPIs that measure potential and what’s yet to come.

Leaders noted:

• “We need KPIs that celebrate learning-in-motion.”
• “What if KPIs included energy and curiosity?”
• “Let’s move from measuring outputs to measuring aliveness.”

These sentiments point directly to a blind spot in most organizational measurement systems: traditional KPIs can’t capture what makes an adaptive organization thrive.

Instead of confirming what already happened (did you hit the target, complete the training, reach the milestone?), we need to be asking future-looking questions:

• Did learning translate into better decisions?
• Did behavior change in the face of uncertainty?
• Did capability grow over time?

Why This Matters Now

With the half-life of skills shrinking and change outpacing many companies’ learning cycles, curiosity and adaptability are becoming the two biggest predictors of workforce success.

But most companies are still rewarding learning completion, not application. Their development and evaluation processes are episodic, not ongoing. And employees are feeling stalled, or they’re falling through the cracks.

What if instead of tying performance to productivity or completion, we tied it to learning and growth? What if we measured progress in terms of vitality, creativity, and “learning-in-motion” instead of checking boxes?

Let’s Talk Curiosity and Energy

Curiosity isn’t a buzzword. A growing body of workforce research shows a strong correlation between curiosity and agility, meaning workers who want to learn adapt more effectively when conditions shift.

“Across industries, businesses are recalibrating expectations…firms increasingly value learning agility over accumulated experience, particularly as automation accelerates skill obsolescence,” wrote Samriddhi Srivastava.

That’s huge when you consider:

• Curiosity fuels exploration and problem solving—the exact behaviors that power innovation and resilience. In practice, curiosity shows up when an employee doesn’t just complete a training module on an AI tool, but experiments with it, asks questions about how it can be better applied in their role and shares what they’ve learned with the team. They’re not waiting to be told what to do next—they’re actively exploring on their own.
• Energy (motivation + engagement) determines whether people act on what they learn. It’s what separates awareness from impact. But we’ve all seen the opposite, too: a high-performer who completes all the requirements and hits their output targets, yet slowly disengages. Their energy fades, experimentation drops, and their performance looks fine on paper, but their adaptability is quietly slipping.

If what we measure reflects what we value, then KPIs that ignore curiosity and sustained engagement are missing the mark. At best, they’re incomplete. At worst, they incentivize compliance over capability.

That’s not adaptability. That’s following a prescription—and it won’t cut it as agility becomes more critical than ever.

Learning-in-Motion Is Not an Event

It’s time to reframe development as ongoing, not episodic, to align with what learning science tells us: the workforce that thrives is built on continuous learning cycles integrated into work itself.

In practice, that looks like:

• Awareness: People must understand their current capabilities and gaps.
• Iteration: They need opportunities and the psychological safety to apply new learnings, reflect on how it went, and adjust as needed.
• Repeat: They need opportunities to keep practicing until the new habit of continuous learning “sticks.”

This isn’t a “neat” process. It’s iterative, dynamic, and messy in the best way because it’s experiential and experimental… and that’s where breakthroughs come from.

It’s also measurable—if we choose metrics that actually match the behaviors we want.

A Better Set of KPIs for Today’s Workforce

So what might modern, meaningful KPIs look like?

Here are four options:

1. Curiosity Index: To measure how frequently people initiate learning behaviors—asking questions, experimenting with tools, seeking feedback—rather than passively consuming content.
2. Energy Score: To track sustained engagement and proactive contribution over time (not just attendance or clicks). How do people show up? With vigor and willingness? Or reluctance and trepidation?
3. Learning-in-Motion Metric: To assess learning trajectory over time and identify real skill development—not one-time snapshots or milestone completion, but progress that actually matters.
4. Adaptability: To examine how often and how well learning translates into real-world changed behavior, improved decision-making, and better results in evolving contexts. Tools like the AQai Adaptability Assessment are designed to measure how individuals respond to change—and how well the organization supports them in that process.

These metrics can shed light on an individual’s capacity for growth and force the organization to value how well people learn, not just the fact that they did.

The Bottom Line

Now is the time for L&D leaders to get hands-on in shaping the future of KPIs. The workforce has changed. Work itself has changed. Our KPIs must, too.

To stay relevant, learning functions must evolve measurement systems to reflect the qualities that actually drive performance in this new era: curiosity, energy, and adaptability.

I want to hear from you: what KPIs sound useful but really aren’t relevant anymore? And which “modern” KPI (curiosity, energy, learning-in-motion, adaptability, or something else) would you like to measure, and why?

This post first appeared on LinkedIn on February 3, 2026. We’ve expanded it here with additional insights and resources.