LJ says 'performance metrics suck and don't work the way they are intended'. So, do you feel strongly about this? Yikes! ;)
Really, though, while I didn't participate or even see any of those prior conversations about this subject, a couple points occur to me... First, while you're of course entitled to your opinion, I hope your blanket dismissal of the subject doesn't discourage others from voicing theirs. If the topic annoys you - and it seems to - my apologies. Not my intention. Second, I'd agree that "no one metric can accurately" say anything about anyone. My "one metric" examples were just given to spur the conversation. And perhaps others have more nuanced answers that involve more than one metric and include qualifications. I'd be interested in hearing about those. As a software engineer (my background), one of the metrics that has been used to judge my work has been "lines of code". In and of itself it's not a useful metric, but combine with other factors it can help provide a broad picture of the performance of different developers. Third, having such data doesn't make it bad or "wrong" data, it depends on how the data is used just like any other data. If used constructively, such metrics could, for example, be used to help assess a developer's strengths and weaknesses with perhaps the goal of working/educating the developer to shore up those weaknesses. And while it's certainly true that information like this can be misused, it doesn't mean we shouldn't have the conversation. Fourth, there ARE clear differences in the performance of different developers. Sometimes there are very valid reasons to judge the relative performance of developers. Sometimes it's because hard choices have to be made like downsizing. Is it better in these situations for the manager to just pick the individual(s) they like the least? Or who they *think* are the least productive? I smell a lawsuit. Wouldn't hard metrics be useful in these cases? Finally, a disclaimer: I don't now or have any near future plans to use such metrics to evaluate anyone...I don't have anyone to evaluate. And while my interest in the topic is more than just idle curiosity, I won't be using it to fire anyone soon. For me, this information is more for research purposes. Thanks, Charlie On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:03 PM, LJ LongWing <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > My opinion is that 'performance metrics suck and don't work the way they > are intended'. There has been healthy debate over the years regarding > exactly that subject, and every time it's happened, either on the list or > otherwise, it ends up being that no one 'metric' can accurately say that > this developer is doing 'better' than another developer. > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Charlie Lotridge <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> ** >> Hi all, >> >> I'm curious...what are your opinions about what might be useful metrics >> to use to judge the performance of Remedy developers? To narrow the >> conversation a bit, let's just talk about during the creation of a new >> custom application, or custom module to an existing application. In other >> words for code generation. >> >> So for example, you might tell me that a good developer can create at >> least 50 logic objects (active links/filters/escalations) in a day. Or >> create & format one form/day. >> >> What are you opinions? >> >> Thanks, >> Charlie >> _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ > > > _ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" and have been for 20 years_ _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org "Where the Answers Are, and have been for 20 years"
