Quantifying the performance of a comminution circuit relative to the potential that can be achieved is a standard requirement in justifying operating practice (the stick) and seeking operational upside (the carrot). Historic measures tend to focus on performance relative to laboratory design tests that provide a direct measure of specific grinding energy, such as the Bond Work index; or use drop_x0002_weight breakage tests calibrated to a substantial database of operating sites, such as the SMC methodology. Although of value, such approaches are flawed in significant aspects. The assumption is that the laboratory prediction is correct and the single sample it is based on is representative. The database benchmarking methods are, by definition, locked into current average operating practice. These approaches do not illuminate upside; can ‘punish’ operations that are actually more efficient, such as grinding finer than standard operation; and reward poor operation that may comfortably produce a coarser grind than optimal for recovery or excess slimes that reduce recovery and increase water consumption and tailings volume. The authors present a set of established and easily applied measures, that draw together daily operation, highlight areas of opportunity and inefficiency, use simple samples and data, and can be used to provide the ‘size of the prize’ in pursuing specific areas of process improvement. These tools include size specific energy (SSE), overall operating effectiveness (OEE) which includes product quality, theory of constraints, and links this to the end objective – maximising the efficient production of valuable metals. Feeds into objective function driven by economics – financial return, energy, environment.