[RHSeeger]

> If management is measuring pull request (PR) throughput, is it really so bad that developers start pushing through smaller PRs? God forbid we end up delivering value faster with fewer defects, better testing, and more thorough peer review.

This one bothered me. Because increased pull request (PR) throughput does not, in ANY way, imply "fewer defects, better testing, and more thorough peer review". In fact, it probably implies the reverse; just writing the smallest amount of code you can to get it out the door, then coming back and adding to it later. Edge cases? Next PR. Automated tests? Next PR. Comments? Next PR. Maintainability? Next PR. Taking the time to make sure the feature you're working on makes sense? That's not a PR, skip it.

Measuring PR throughput is the same as measuring lines of code, effectively. Nothing about increasing either one of them implies adding real value.