A results dashboard can make a healthy programme look broken and a broken one look fine - it depends which numbers you read. This page covers the three metrics that matter, the honest limits of the rest, and the conversation that actually changes a repeat clicker.
Every platform draws confident-looking charts. Treat them like a senior engineer treats any measurement: ask what the number can and cannot prove before acting on it. Then act on people the way the programme promised - privately, kindly, and with training instead of blame.
And one popular number to distrust: opens. Modern mail privacy features and security scanners pre-open messages automatically, so open rates measure software, not people. Grade them as noise and never report them upward as fact.
Click rates move with template difficulty, workload, time of day and how much mail a role receives - a busy accounts inbox is a harder test than a quiet one. That is why the honest comparison is your own last round at similar difficulty, not an industry percentage from a brochure. A higher click rate on a deliberately harder round can be progress in disguise; read the context before reading the verdict.
The conversation is short and private: no blame, a look at the email together, the two checks that would have caught it, and the five-minute module booked there and then. Check the human factors too - mail volume, stress, a phone screen where the sender address hides. Never publish names, never circulate a list, and never let results touch appraisals. The day staff believe clicking means punishment is the day they stop reporting real incidents - the costliest outcome a programme can produce.
Leadership gets a one-slide story: totals per round, the reported-rate trend, the coaching completed, the next scenario planned. Department-level percentages at the very most, and small teams merged so nobody can be identified by arithmetic. If a manager asks for names, the approval document answers for you - that refusal was agreed before the campaign existed, which is exactly why it was written down.
See the results view in the video and how the campaign numbers are presented after a send.
▶️ Watch Full VideoThere is no universal score - difficulty, role and mail volume move it too much. Your first round is a baseline; improvement against your own previous rounds, at similar difficulty, is the only honest verdict.
Both numbers record it, and that is fine. The report is the behaviour the programme exists to build, so count it proudly - and the click still earns them the short coaching module. No contradiction.
No - and the approval document should say so explicitly. Linking results to discipline kills incident reporting across the whole company, which is a far bigger security loss than any single click.