Dev productivity metrics suck. Ops reviews are key for AI-accelerated eng orgs
gsdatta
11 points
8 comments
July 09, 2026
Related Discussions
Found 5 related stories in 839.5ms across 14,015 title embeddings via pgvector HNSW
- Ask HN: AI productivity gains – do you fire devs or build better products? Bleiglanz · 88 pts · March 22, 2026 · 58% similar
- Bosses say AI boosts productivity – workers say they're drowning in 'workslop' Brajeshwar · 18 pts · April 15, 2026 · 56% similar
- Preliminary data from a longitudinal AI impact study donutshop · 44 pts · March 11, 2026 · 53% similar
- AI saves about 3% of your hours, and almost none of it reaches the money ermantrout · 73 pts · July 03, 2026 · 51% similar
- The economics of software teams: Why most engineering orgs are flying blind kiyanwang · 393 pts · April 13, 2026 · 51% similar
Discussion Highlights (4 comments)
gsdatta
Dev productivity metrics frameworks are (and always have been, IMO) bad for measuring organizational effectiveness. Operational Excellence reviews are the future of measuring and improving organizational health, and I wrote a paper making the case for this + a framework that helps make the OE review effective.
georgemcbay
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_XSShVAnkY
xutopia
Their web site has a missing image.
CraigJPerry
I'm trying to disentangle this from the established / proven / trusted "dx core 4" (ask your local devops person if you don't recognise the name). I found "initiatives" was added. What does this new initiatives measure bring. Why do we care about otherwise unqualified initiatives, how do i know that doesn't just mean using the other 4 proven measures as cover for pushing pet projects without merit? I'm super cynical tonight it seems. This is just rubbing me up the wrong way i guess and i can't really put my finger on why.