[nugget]

Most companies do a very poor job of accurately measuring employee productivity/output on an individual basis. It seems to me that “40 hours per week” made sense for physical jobs where output was a multiple of hours worked, and then was adopted by newer firms as a low friction, culturally accepted placeholder for “give us your best effort and don’t have another full time job at the same time”.

[nradov]

It is simply impossible to accurately measure knowledge worker productivity on an individual basis. Any attempt to do so causes serious unintended consequences where employees attempt to game the metrics instead of doing the right thing for the business.

[nugget]

I think it's possible, but usually non-cost-effective because it has to be done on a 1:1 basis and therefore doesn't scale well. For example: I can intensively audit a developer's code for a couple weeks (in real time) and usually get a good feel for the blend of skill/time/effort being invested. But it's so time intensive for me to do that, that it's reserved for extreme situations.

[nradov]

Writing code is only a small part of a developer's job. If you focus on that then you'll miss a lot of other key productivity factors, such as contributions to team design discussions, code reviews, defect root cause analysis, etc.

So in short no, it's not possible to accurately measure developer productivity even if cost isn't a factor. Employee evaluations are necessarily subjective and we simply have to accept inaccuracy.

[Stratoscope]

> “give us your best effort and don’t have another full time job at the same time”

Unless you're Jack Dorsey!