[lgleason]

More lines of code = more liability. Also more commits, frequency of commits etc. does not equate to more productivity. In fact in some instances you actually are introducing more liability into a codebase doing that. The flaw with most of these metrics of "productivity" is that they inherently are saying that coding is analogous to a factory worker building something when in reality it is analogous to someone designing the things the factory worker has to assemble.

While I'm not a fan of subjectivity in ratings, the challenge is that it is very difficult, and I would argue, virtually impossible to do it objectively. So what happens instead is that when metrics are used to evaluate engineers, the smart ones figure out how to game them. Does that make them, or the team more productive? Nope. Can that have un-intended consequences that actually make the code less stable, and decrease productivity. Yup!

But if you're going to go with these measurements you might as well go big. Throw out anything related to Agile, require estimates that are accurate within 15 minutes and severely punish engineers for not getting estimates right. Might as well also add in heavy documentation requirements too. After all, this rigorous measurement etc. has all worked so well in the past <dripping sarcasm for this last paragraph>.