Not sure, but I have worked a lot on stuff where the metrics were often very easily convertible to business decisions, like expenses or income. Things like how much do we need to pay for infrastructure, how much money each customer/products brings in and how etc.

If the company were an airplane essentially upper management were flying it by instrument. It would've been a scandal if the metrics had serious issues.

Some of the metrics less directly tied to business stuff were a bit more 'creative' - as in I could justify why I did them that way, but still not 100% solid.

Stuff like optimizing data pipelines, where data scientist experiments which tended to take 1hr, now only took 10 mins.

I could say that data people were 6x as productive, but it's just as well possible they were just more careless with what they ran, but whatever, a white lie.

However saying that stuff takes 1/6th the time, when in fact it doesn't, is an absolute no go. Neither is not knowing why is there a run that took 500 hours or 5 seconds, both of which should be impossible.

Doing that stuff destroys the confidence in the rest of the data.