[small_model]

Mangers and executives have better tools now to track a tech workers output/performance, they will cut the useless/low performers/in over their head people who were hired during preceding years. A small tech team with proficient intelligent devs augmented with AI can replace 100's of duds.

[genthree]

My experience has been that a good small team, even full of people who’d stand no chance in a FAANG interview (fwiw) can outperform at least 5x as many devs in your median bigco, while maintaining a relaxed pace.

The reason for this has nothing to do with how productive the devs are per se and everything to do with bloated decision making processes and extremely high communication overhead. “AI” does nothing for that (in fact, I’m seeing integrated suggestions in ticket tracking tools making things spammier and reducing quality of tickets, so if anything, it’s making it worse)

[davebren]

No what happens from using those metrics is that you filter out all the people that care more about doing their job well than gaming metrics. Fraudsters tend to do really well in those situations.

[thway15269037]

It's baffling that with current iteration of hype mania all of the lessons about metrics were thrown out of the window. Goodhart's law anyone?

All of a sudden all of the terrible, horrifying methods of measuring lines of code, commits, tasks etc. resurfaced, like world was hit with an amnesia meteor.

[thr0w]

You sweet, innocent child.

Managers understand that metrics are meaningless. The idea is to have something to point at to scare engineers into jumping higher.

[derwiki]

Exactly. All these internal “AI Leaderboards” are a proxy for “who is working.”