Speak up metrics are a Rorschach test. Everyone sees what they want to see.

Earlier today, I joined EQS Group's Daniel Wedge and Vodafone’s Emily Webberley for a webinar on why people don’t speak up.

And we hit a classic compliance conundrum: what does good look like when it comes to speak up?

Because the answer isn’t obvious.

More reports sounds like a good thing. People know what to do, trust the process, and believe something will happen if they raise an issue. Or is it a bad sign because there’s a lot going wrong? Fewer reports could be good because it means fewer issues; maybe things are being dealt with early, informally, and well. Or is it bad because people have decided they don’t want to speak up?

The same is true of anonymous reporting.

Lots of anonymous reports could be good because you’re getting more information. Or does the fact people are using the anonymous channel mean they don’t feel safe enough to use their own names? Fewer anonymous reports could mean people feel psychologically safe. Or it could mean they’re just not reporting things.

Even the volume of reports can be deceptive. Encourage people to report more, and the number might go up. But more reports doesn’t necessarily mean what’s being reported is useful.

All of which means you can’t simply conclude that a particular number of reports is good or bad; you need to understand the context.

Like all things involving humans, it’s complicated. And the data won’t tell the full story.