Skip to content
PROTOTYPE — MOCK DATAFigures are generated fixtures derived from the registry. Not ACF actuals.
Menu (13)
LAYER 3 — DEPARTMENT KPI PACK

Appraisal / Underwriting

12 metrics9 leading · 3 lagging4 manual8 managed7 without a target
Applications received
AP-01
12,940.4
No target
MANAGEDAppraisal daily report⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

Approval ratio
AP-02
55.2%
No target
MANAGEDAppraisal daily report⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

TAT — Installment CD
AP-03
14.3
No target
MANAGEDAppraisal daily report⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

TAT — ACS cross-sell
AP-04
23.8
No target
MANAGEDAppraisal daily report⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

TAT — Cash NTB
AP-05
41.3
No target
MANAGEDAppraisal daily report⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

Decline-reason mix
AP-06
42.4%
No target
MANAGEDLOOMS / Scoring⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Development

Throughput per underwriter
AP-07
2,015.7
No target
MANAGEDdaily report + HR⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

Score-band cut-off adherence
AP-08
0
On target
MANAGEDAppraisal daily report⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

FPD5+ on approved vintage
AP-09
1.8%
-2.2pp vs target 4.0%
MANUALDWH⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

QA sample pass rate
AP-10
51.6%
-43.4pp vs target 95.0%
MANUALAppraisal QC⏱ T+1target proposed

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

KRI 376/2024 — assessment errors
AP-11
0.0%
On target
MANUALAppraisal QC⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

KRI 376/2024 — fraud/collusion detected
AP-12
0
On target
MANUALFraud + Appraisal⏱ T+1

Head of Appraisal Department·IT System Planning

LAYER 4 · THE PEOPLE UNDER THESE NUMBERS
readiness 47/100
7
ROSTERED
people with a scorecard
25%
COVERAGE
median · floor 60%
0
CAN BE RATED
of 7
0/4
GATE
conditions met

Commitments: 103 of 147 delivered by the date agreed (70.1%), from the project tool via the delivery feed. Not comparable with another department's figure — their work is not the same kind of work.

Nobody in this department can be rated today — and the reason is above the line, not below it: coverage is 25% because these metrics mostly have no target and none is certified. Fixing the pack fixes Layer 4; there is no separate Layer-4 problem to solve.

Team rosterAll departments
INTERNAL PROCESS · WHAT WE NEED BACK
  1. Is this what you are accountable for? Delete what is not; add what is missing.
  2. Is the formula right — especially the denominator?
  3. Who is the metric owner and who is the data owner? They must be two different people.
  4. What is the target, and on what basis was it set?
  5. Where does the number come from today — which system, or which spreadsheet?