[HN Gopher] Ex-Finance developers mock McKinsey's dev productivi...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ex-Finance developers mock McKinsey's dev productivity metrics
        
       Author : Terretta
       Score  : 90 points
       Date   : 2023-09-15 18:27 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.efinancialcareers.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.efinancialcareers.com)
        
       | q7xvh97o2pDhNrh wrote:
       | I clicked through to the linked McKinsey article [1] to see what
       | all the hubbub was about, and I found this gem:
       | 
       | > For example, one company found that its most talented
       | developers were spending excessive time on noncoding activities
       | such as design sessions or managing interdependencies across
       | teams. In response, the company changed its operating model and
       | clarified roles and responsibilities to enable those highest-
       | value developers to do what they do best: code.
       | 
       | The rest of the article is equally hare-brained. It's a sort of
       | clueless MBA thinking that believes software engineers should be
       | furiously typing all the time, and it entirely fails to
       | understand that actual software engineering is about solving
       | business problems.
       | 
       | Stuff like this really makes me wish I'd optimized for $$$
       | earlier in my career, and I only hope I can retire before this
       | kind of absurd thinking spreads into real technology companies.
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-
       | tel...
        
         | ryandrake wrote:
         | > It's a sort of clueless MBA thinking that believes software
         | engineers should be furiously typing all the time
         | 
         | (Your point is good, but the dig against MBAs is unnecessary
         | and I wish it was less acceptable here on HN. It wouldn't be ok
         | to make fun of people with Sociology degrees or History degrees
         | here, but jokes about MBAs get a pass. We really should be
         | better than that, but I realize I'm swimming against the
         | current on this one.)
         | 
         | That aside, I _have_ found a lot of clueless folks in tech
         | leadership have that  "furiously typing" misconception, as if
         | developers are only productive when their fingertips are
         | pounding keys. I once worked with a CEO who refused to set
         | aside time in the schedule for things like setting up source
         | control and a bug tracker, because he believed that developers
         | should be furiously typing code in at all times.
        
           | turndown wrote:
           | If sociology or history degrees doled out management
           | positions the way MBAs somehow do I guarantee you they would
           | be met with derision. It's like making fun of politicians, it
           | happens because they are often inappropriately given power.
        
           | version_five wrote:
           | What is the problem with criticism "mba thinking"? It's a
           | legit complaint against the kind of naive "efficiency"
           | analyses and measures that happen, and is completely
           | justified. I have an MBA, I certainly don't find it
           | offensive, I think the criticism is apt.
           | 
           | The usual art student tropes are more offensive because they
           | are about people in a chosen degree being dumb (incidentally,
           | when I did engineering all the hardcore "haha artsies are so
           | dumb" engineers failed out after first year). That's not the
           | same as criticizing a specific flaw in their education. If
           | there's some big blind spot the average sociology degree
           | leaves, that should be fair game.
        
           | heyoni wrote:
           | How is that being better? There's a pattern of management
           | coming out of business schools that's clearly not working
           | because at the end of the day, you have managers trying to
           | micro not macro manage highly skilled workers working in
           | areas they don't understand well. The result is hilarious.
           | We're supposed to suppress that? To be better? Is laughing
           | bad now?
        
         | jowea wrote:
         | I wonder if McKinsey just skipped over the part where they
         | hired/assigned specific people for design, inter-team
         | coordination and code monkeying or if they actually decided
         | that "design sessions or managing interdependencies across
         | teams" should not be done.
         | 
         | And maybe the corporate $$$ optimization means real technology
         | company will avoid this.
        
         | neilv wrote:
         | Charitably, I guess they _might 've_ meant something different
         | with that quote (say, they were referring to people who were
         | only good at coding, and the roles for design and cross-team
         | coordination were covered better by different people).
         | 
         | But they keep coming across poorly on that metrics project.
         | 
         | I'm imagining their clients optimizing their operations, by
         | bringing in management consultants, to tell them that the
         | earlier management consultants need to be enabled to do what
         | they do best: stay the heck away from sabotaging software
         | development organizations.
        
       | jph wrote:
       | A deep dive on developer productivity metrics tends to lead to
       | queueing theory. This is an area some developers know because of
       | DORA and metrics such as MTTR or shorthands such as "do one merge
       | per day". It turns out that knowing some queueing theory can be
       | very helpful when talking about productivity metrics, kanban,
       | ticket servicing, and more.
       | 
       | My notes on queueing theory for developers:
       | 
       | https://github.com/joelparkerhenderson/queueing-theory
        
       | siva7 wrote:
       | I wonder how they retain senior talent with such bs? Pay must be
       | exceptional i guess.
        
       | IKantRead wrote:
       | I don't think any leadership team has hired McKinsey because they
       | think McKinsey does a world class job at leading software
       | projects.
       | 
       | McKinsey is in the business of reputation laundering. They start
       | the process by building up reputation. They hire from prestigious
       | schools, have prestigious customers, make themselves a household
       | name for the people that matter.
       | 
       | Then when you need someone to make an unpopular decision for you,
       | or take the blame for a project failure, they swoop in and take
       | you money in exchange for taking the reputation hit. It's fine,
       | they know how to grow more reputation when necessary, and
       | everyone at your org or in the media if the situation calls for
       | it, points to them and says "what a bad/stupid/down right evil
       | decision McKinsey made!" while remain the responsible person who
       | tried their best by hiring what you and your peers thought was
       | the best.
        
         | doctor_eval wrote:
         | Tell that to my former manager.
        
         | spamizbad wrote:
         | You'd be surprised. I could very easily see former McKinsey
         | alumni sprinkled through the industry slurping this stuff up.
        
         | candiddevmike wrote:
         | McKinsey is normalized industrial espionage. You pay them to
         | validate what you're doing against your competitors. They'll
         | tell you if you're ahead or behind. McKinsey is in business
         | because McKinsey is in businesses.
        
           | herewego wrote:
           | This and it's very well known, but don't discount their
           | talent. There are plenty of smart and effective people at
           | McKinsey, even if they make mistakes like the rest of
           | humanity.
        
           | version_five wrote:
           | That would be way better than why they actually are. It's a
           | bunch of pretentious sycophantic kids who target empty
           | "leadership" types with advice that sounds smart if you don't
           | think to hard but has extremely good production values.
           | There's a reason they exist but it has absolutely nothing to
           | do with bringing anything of value other than reputation and
           | knowing their audience. Actually bringing outside info from
           | competitors would be cool but way too tangible for them.
        
         | synaesthesisx wrote:
         | McKinsey sells the "idea" that they're experts that know what
         | they're doing, rather than actually doing a good job.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | biogene wrote:
       | IMO, you can take the dev word out, many productivity metrics are
       | of dubious value, because corporate people love applying
       | structures and systems to problems, only due to the fact that it
       | is a structure rather than any inherent benefit.
       | 
       | Person A might need a completely different style of
       | management/metrics than Person B, and Person A after a year might
       | need yet another style of management/metrics. Its all messy and
       | ad-hoc, because such are humans.
       | 
       | (Not a perfect analogy) If you replace humans with processors,
       | and work with code, its the same efficiency paradox that devs
       | know all too well. You apply an abstraction to solve a design
       | problem, even if you already are aware that the Good(tm) solution
       | is a hardware specific optimization or a new API design just to
       | solve that one problem. Abstractions are seen as seemingly
       | scalable, give you flexibility and leverage in other ways so they
       | are Better(tm).
       | 
       | Performance focused devs are the complete opposite they give you
       | maximum efficiency, by have a near-perfect match with the
       | code>compiler>hardware. But at the significant cost of increased
       | dev timelines, code complexity, stress, etc. The manager
       | equivalent here would be the same where they are able to match
       | their own style to the specific person they're managing. But
       | these styles are impossible to create a universal system around.
        
       | swader999 wrote:
       | Anytime I manage I refuse to track dev productivity individually.
       | Its all about how much functionality (complexity points) gets net
       | accepted in prod per unit of time from the whole team.
       | 
       | If you measure at the team level you get collaboration and much
       | better solutions. It's a friendlier and more rewarding way to
       | work with little turnover. It encourages product, dev and QA to
       | work together and solve user problems in economical ways, not
       | just throw solutions over the fence to the next stage.
       | 
       | And yeah sure I know if there's someone not performing up to
       | their pay rate, you don't need numbers for that, you need to be
       | involved and looking at their code.
        
         | justin_oaks wrote:
         | > looking at their code.
         | 
         | I can't imagine many development managers do that. And even if
         | they did, I'm not convinced that many would make a good
         | assessment that way.
         | 
         | Most of the managers I've had over my career have been poor
         | coders. I'd hate to have them judging me by their conception of
         | what good code is.
         | 
         | EDIT: I guess many people have had better managers than I've
         | had. So my "most" and "many" may be off base.
        
           | the-smug-one wrote:
           | Counting myself as fortunate that I can git-blame and find my
           | managers' (admittedly often old commit) name in the code base
           | :-).
        
             | swader999 wrote:
             | Fair point!
        
           | swader999 wrote:
           | Well do you think someone managing development shouldn't know
           | how to code? How would they hire? I've never worked on teams
           | where dev is larger than six and I've always coded though.
           | Bigger than six is automatically create another team in my
           | books.
        
             | icedchai wrote:
             | Sadly, it's very common. They typically ask one of the more
             | senior engineers to assist with hiring. Earlier in my
             | career, the managers knew how to code. Last 10 years... not
             | so much.
        
           | biogene wrote:
           | How many managers have you had? Seems like an odd
           | generalization.
        
           | hn_throwaway_99 wrote:
           | > I can't imagine many development managers do that.
           | 
           | Wow, just a reminder that everyone's experience is unique and
           | can't always be generalized. My first thought was "I can't
           | imagine a development manager _not_ doing that. "
           | 
           | Seriously, I feel for you. Essentially all of the engineering
           | managers I've had at one point or another have been coders.
           | Some were well, well out of practice by the time they were my
           | manager, and as I moved up in my career my managers were less
           | interested in the details of my code, but I could always talk
           | with them about highly technical concepts. I really feel bad
           | for folks who think their engineering managers can't judge
           | good code. And as someone who's also been an eng manager, I
           | can't imagine managing devs _without_ having an understanding
           | of good code.
        
             | justin_oaks wrote:
             | I admit it; my experience is my own and I'm happy to find
             | out that other people have had better management than I
             | have.
             | 
             | And you're right that it's absurd to try to judge
             | developers without an understanding of good code. I just
             | figured the world is absurd.
        
       | paulcole wrote:
       | Developers snark about MBAs! News at 11!
        
       | darth_avocado wrote:
       | Counter intuitive, but sometimes dev productivity revolves around
       | actively not shipping things or making sure you drive initiatives
       | that are purely a product of "banana measuring contests" to the
       | ground.
       | 
       | "Hey let's ship this AI chat bot I heard about at a conference".
       | How about we save those hundreds of thousands of dollars that
       | we'll spend on training a sub par chatbot that will result in
       | frustrated users who will leave with whatever limited revenue we
       | get from them.
        
       | brolumir wrote:
       | > Kent Beck, ex-fellow at payroll infrastructure fintech Gusto
       | ...
       | 
       | Really weird way to introduce Kent Beck
        
       | jncfhnb wrote:
       | What is this article?
       | 
       | Why is it citing three seemingly non noteworthy people's opinions
       | and crediting them with their former roles as a headline
       | takeaway? Are we to take away that they are currently unemployed?
        
         | badrabbit wrote:
         | Their former roles and industry experience is why they are
         | noteworthy and being quoted. I have no idea why your takeaway
         | is that, if I said "I used to live in san francisco" would your
         | takeaway be that I now live homeless outside of any city? And
         | if the subject was about measuring crime in san francisco,
         | would former SFPD cops being quotes seem abnormal to you?
        
           | jncfhnb wrote:
           | I do think it would be very strange to write an article with
           | the headline "Ex-Cops mock a new office policy"
           | 
           | It's a very pointless article and it's strange to focus on a
           | few random people's opinions on something that does not have
           | obvious importance. Especially when hundreds of thousands of
           | workers who are active.
           | 
           | One of these people seem to be a former entry level worker.
           | Why? This is less valid than "some people on Twitter said"
        
             | plasma_beam wrote:
             | Gergely Orosz has a very popular blog/newsletter and has
             | posted on the McKinsey report.
             | 
             | https://blog.pragmaticengineer.com/author/gergely/
             | 
             | https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/measuring-
             | develop...
             | 
             | https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/measuring-
             | develop...
        
               | jncfhnb wrote:
               | That should be explained in the article then! Not citing
               | his former role!
        
         | ebiester wrote:
         | Dave Farley, Kent Beck and Gergely Orosz are hardly non-
         | noteworthy people. Farley is best known as being a significant
         | contributor to Continuous Delivery. Kent Beck was an initial
         | signatory to the agile manifesto. Gergely Orosz has four books
         | to his credit and has a significant following.
         | 
         | Farley didn't mock them - he had open contempt. Beck and Orosz
         | wrote a great critique, but had no mocking involved.
         | 
         | But calling them ex-fintech is kind of like saying Marjorie
         | Taylor Greene is an ex-CrossFit gym owner. While technically
         | true, it's not the relevant accomplishment in most
         | conversations.
        
           | jncfhnb wrote:
           | Ok! So that makes sense. These are people with some
           | credibility and authority.
           | 
           | Why the hell is this not mentioned in the article in favor of
           | their former jobs?!
        
             | ebiester wrote:
             | It's an article written by someone outside the community
             | with low context, and likely for $20 or something similar.
             | 
             | It's a low quality article.
        
         | asplake wrote:
         | Doing the rounds just about everywhere: "Yes, you can measure
         | software developer productivity"
         | https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/technology-media-and-tel...
        
       | akomtu wrote:
       | Anyone's productivity can be measured, or at least what's left of
       | that productivity after measuring. You may know nothing about how
       | musicians make music, but you can measure superficial traits,
       | such as the number of distinct notes used per minute of music,
       | the feedback score from a committee you hired, the lead time to
       | deliver a musical unit, and so on.
        
         | nitwit005 wrote:
         | These people want to optimize making money. If you compare
         | technical musical ability against musician income, I suspect
         | you'll find a surprisingly weak relationship.
        
         | realo wrote:
         | John Cage might not fit into your simple models, I'm afraid:
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/4'33''
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-09-15 23:01 UTC)