The Problem With Reductionist Metrics for Productivity

3min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

The problem of leaders organizations kind of picking a convenient metric like commits, lines of code, pull requests, something like that. Once you measure it, people want to game itBasically. The idea is that if I just count one thing and there are human beings on the other end of it who are incentivized to look good on that single dimension,. You've also now disincentivized other types of work.

This week we’re joined by Ciera Jaspan and Collin Green, who lead the Engineering Productivity Research team at Google. Ciera and Collin have written several papers from studies they’ve conducted, and this discussion covers the insights from their research as well as their work more broadly at Google.

Discussion points:

(1:19) About the Engineering Productivity Research team
(3:57) How the team interacts with the rest of the organization
(5:58) The different backgrounds included on the team
(13:11) How Google measures developer productivity
(18:54) Evaluating discrepancies between qualitative and quantitative data
(28:40) Google’s quarterly developer survey
(32:02) Distributing survey results back to the organization
(40:25) Misunderstandings about surveys
(43:51) Ciera and Collin’s paper on why measuring productivity is difficult
(50:35) Reductionist metrics for measuring productivity
(55:26) Examples of other fields that have struggled with measurement
(59:00) Google’s study on measuring technical debt
(1:08:05) Human judgment in measurement

Mentions and links:
Follow Ciera and Collin on LinkedIn
A Human-Centered Approach to Measuring Developer Productivity - Paper, Abi’s summary
Enabling the Study of Software Development with Cross-Tool Logs - Paper
Defining, Measuring, and Managing Tech Debt - Paper, Abi’s summary
Google’s Goals, Signals, Metrics framework - Paper, Abi’s summary