[josephg]

The alternative to measuring everything seems obvious. Don’t measure everything.

Why not measure everything? Because measurement has a cost. And some things cost more to measure than you gain from the measurement.

I was on a team once with a product owner who insisted on absolutely everything being in jira with story point estimations. Well, that’s fine and good but one day I sat down with the designer and walked through the product. We made a list of about 30 things that needed fixing - almost all of them trivial. “This is the wrong shade of blue”. “There is too much spacing here”, etc. Well, I made a list in notepad and got going but I got in trouble for not putting it in jira. Only, it would have taken longer to write up these issues than it would have taken to fix them. To say nothing of wasting everyone’s time doing story point estimation. In this case, measuring our work would have cost significantly more than doing the work! We argued back and forth and eventually he admitted he wanted things in jira to appease upper management, who I suppose wanted to know how busy we were by looking at a number on a spreadsheet.

(He ended up writing up all my points in jira himself, guessing costs and ticking them all off as “done”. What a waste of time.)

And no, software isn’t special. Teaching isn’t measured (except maybe with a student survey at the end of the year). Science is measured in citations per lifetime, not micropapers/hr. And you don’t quantitatively measure your spouse, your friends or your enjoyment of mum’s cooking.

Measurement is a lovely tool. But don’t make a religion out of it. I heard a story from a leadership summit recently. A young CEO got up and said “But there’s no way I’d make hiring and firing decisions by gut instinct!”. A bunch of the older people there disagreed immediately, and said that’s exactly what you should do. Train your instincts then trust them to do their job.

[pcthrowaway]

> But there’s no way I’d make ... firing decisions by gut instinct

Well the reason it's so important to hone your gut instinct for good hiring decisions is that you absolutely should have measurements for firing decisions (at least in the US); that decision needs be defensible with data under the scrutiny of a lawsuit

[withinboredom]

You don't need a reason to fire someone in the most of the US (AFAIK). You can just say that they walked in with a red shirt and you don't like red shirts. As long as the reasoning isn't because they are in a protected class, you can pick whatever reason you want.

[pcthrowaway]

Firing someone "because they walked in with a red shirt" would do damage to your company's reputation, and call into question the competence of your management team.

And you can still get sued.

[withinboredom]

I mean. You can get sued for wearing a red shirt. It would probably get tossed out in ten seconds (unless the judge just wants some entertainment). But you can sue anyone for anything. You can do tens of millions of dollars to a company, get fired for it, and sue them. Nothing is stopping you.

Secondly, no one is going to give a shit why you fired someone except the person you fired (if you even told them why), and HR. In fact, most companies don’t even give managers firing authority, but if you are the owner/CEO or someone who does have that authority, it’s possible even HR doesn’t know the reason. That person is just fired.

[synergy20]

not interested in measuring everything, neither do I believe 'measuring nothing because I'm a software developer'

Agile has its merits, abuse it is obviously wrong.

There got be something that is practical and get the job done and benefit all parties in software project management, I'm searching for answers myself.