[4yfr]

What outcomes though? The ones I’ve seen posted are still nonsensical metrics that a publicly traded firm absolutely doesn’t care about.

It wants to see faster R&D, higher revenues from existing assets, greater operating margins, higher sales to invested capital ratio and so on…

The best way to measure that for a software firm is up-time of services, usage and project completion duration

[wpasc]

measuring uptime? I've seen Anthropic's status page, and they are a >$1 Trillion dollar company who "largely solved" coding. so clearly you aren't correct. /s

[janalsncm]

Ok, uptime. How do you measure an individual’s contribution to uptime? If Claude goes down does everyone take a hit? If Claude stays up everyone gets rewarded?

If so, your metric cannot distinguish between a bad engineer and a good one.

If not, you have the same problem you started with: measuring contributions to “uptime”.

[andsoitis]

> If so, your metric cannot distinguish between a bad engineer and a good one.

A metric that moves in the same direction and amount for everyone based on external event isn’t a problem. The delta in performance of the great engineer will outweigh that of the poor, since the metric movement that is due to external circumstances will be the same in each kind of engineer and thus not count.

[janalsncm]

That’s a new one. I have never heard of a company which operates like this, giving everyone equal reward no matter how much they contribute individually.

[lokar]

Unfortunately that is a group metric, we need individual metrics