My company has standardized the scrum process and tools throughout the company including things like the start and end date of each sprint so that all iterations for all scrum teams start and end at the same time. Although they don't always share the metrics with us, it is my understanding that management looks at various metrics that they collect. It seems to me that some metrics are reasonable and some are pretty crazy. I think that comparing team velocity across scrum teams doesn't make much sense since each team calibrates their points a little different. Of course, the company has some general guidelines for small, medium, and large stories (3, 5, and 8 points), but I don't think the sizing of stories can be standardized enough to make cross team comparisons useful. However, process metrics, such as the number of stories planned vs completed per sprint seem to make some sense to me. However, this seems to encourage us on the scrum teams to plan very conservatively. Since we know that management is looking at this, we do not commit to more that we are absolutely sure we can complete in each sprint. This results in us always completing our stories for the sprint early. We then start work on stuff for the next sprint or whatever we think is useful. Maybe that is the way it should work or is not?