Thank you Nicola. I absolutely agree that active listening is a key, without it you cannot identify if spike in metrics is outcome of positive or negative experience that developers had (more deployments as a result of a better process or a rapid bug-fixing?)
It seem that all frameworks in the past years help us to identify if engineering…
Thank you Nicola. I absolutely agree that active listening is a key, without it you cannot identify if spike in metrics is outcome of positive or negative experience that developers had (more deployments as a result of a better process or a rapid bug-fixing?)
It seem that all frameworks in the past years help us to identify if engineering as a business function operates in productive matter or not, which is reasonable expectation. At the same time, I think most engineers dislike productivity metrics because they feel that those numbers don't reflect reality and they will be used to compare them with other engineers, and as a result, turn unfair. EM's assure not to do it (business is less interested on this topic), but they also want to be objective while callibrating engineers performance so they will give promotions and right grades to the right people. I don't think DORA or DevEX have answer for that because they focus on group performance. SPACE touched individual performance topic but just briefly. I like where DevEx turns the industry, but I guess it won't help EMs be more objective during callibrations and performance reviews - because DevEX solves different problem, or different level of engineering productivity (as a function, or as a group).
Sorry for the long comment, but if you have any thoughts on this Nicola, let me know.
Thank you Nicola. I absolutely agree that active listening is a key, without it you cannot identify if spike in metrics is outcome of positive or negative experience that developers had (more deployments as a result of a better process or a rapid bug-fixing?)
It seem that all frameworks in the past years help us to identify if engineering as a business function operates in productive matter or not, which is reasonable expectation. At the same time, I think most engineers dislike productivity metrics because they feel that those numbers don't reflect reality and they will be used to compare them with other engineers, and as a result, turn unfair. EM's assure not to do it (business is less interested on this topic), but they also want to be objective while callibrating engineers performance so they will give promotions and right grades to the right people. I don't think DORA or DevEX have answer for that because they focus on group performance. SPACE touched individual performance topic but just briefly. I like where DevEx turns the industry, but I guess it won't help EMs be more objective during callibrations and performance reviews - because DevEX solves different problem, or different level of engineering productivity (as a function, or as a group).
Sorry for the long comment, but if you have any thoughts on this Nicola, let me know.