The dashboard nobody looks at
Every company has one. Sometimes twenty of them. Someone built them in a burst of quarterly energy, and then they slowly stopped being consulted, because they weren't actually connected to a decision anyone had to make.
The problem is not the tool. The problem is that dashboards are usually designed around what's easy to display, not around what someone has to decide.
“A dashboard should end in a verb.”
Designing backwards from the decision
The dashboards people actually use are the ones designed backwards from a specific weekly (or daily) decision. "Which campaign do we cut?" is a decision. "Which page do we rewrite?" is a decision. "Which account should the founder call?" is a decision. None of these are answered by a chart. They're answered by a short list, ranked, with the reason each item is on the list.
This is the difference between analytics-as-instrumentation and analytics-as-decision-support. The instrumentation is necessary. It just isn't sufficient.
If a chart doesn't imply a specific move — for a specific person, on a specific day — it's instrumentation, not analytics. Either promote it or don't put it on the page.
The read that closes the gap
FullView's Analytics doesn't try to replace the instrumentation. It replaces the surface. What you see on the top of an analytics view should be the four to seven things a well-run team should decide this week — each with a subject, a magnitude, a bit of context, and the move it points at.
The instrumentation lives underneath, one click away, exactly where it belongs.
