4 ms·

And that's precisely why number of tickets is just part of the story :-) Not sure if you have taken your time to read entire post. And indeed - I know my team a

And that's precisely why number of tickets is just part of the story :-) Not sure if you have taken your time to read entire post. And indeed - I know my team and as pointed this simple indicator helps me find out if there may be problems like burnouts or if tasks rotation is right but what would you suggest to use to all those folks who are building new team? And just little comment on your first suggestion - you need to have some data supporting your story when you go to see the financial exec and negotiate rises. Your subjective opinion may mean a lot to you, but in many cases may be not enough when you want to do money talk.

sheepmullet 11y ago
> And that's precisely why number of tickets is just part of the story Hopefully one you are wise enough to keep to yourself :). I've seen so many problems even with the use of relatively sane metrics. > what would you suggest to use to all those folks who are building new team? Management, not metrics. At best you can use metrics as a rule of thumb to give you early indicators of possible issues. For a new team though you need to work together with them for a while to learn about their performance and capabilities. There is no other way. Perhaps one guy in your team is thoughtful and methodical and takes a week per issue but can solve complex issues, and another girl in your team can fly through half a dozen simpler issues in a week. That's actually the kind of diversity you want to encourage and it's something you can easily destroy if you consider #tickets closed an important metric. You should never mention metrics as a measure of performance with either your subordinates or your superiors. Your subordinates will work to the metrics rather than do what needs doing. And your superiors will start relying on the metrics instead of on your judgment. For example if you collect and use the #tickets solved per month as a metric then if you need to downsize your manager will say lets get rid of the people solving less than x tickets per month. Oh wait that includes some of your best people! Now you have an uphill battle, especially if you have used the #tickets closed as a reason to promote someone in your team. Edit: Basically the potential gains are minimal and the potential issues are numerous.
sheepmullet 11y ago
> you need to have some data supporting your story when you go to see the financial exec and negotiate rises. Dodgy metrics probably won't convince your exec either. If you are consistently building your team members capabilities then convincing the exec is easy. For example you can say Ben has solved complex cases A, B, and C in the last six months, and the work is clearly at a senior level but his pay doesn't reflect it. Lets fix it. Or: John has taken on supervision and mentoring tasks for Sam, Ben, and Steve, while still performing at a high level. He has mentioned to me in our one on ones that he wants to take on more leadership tasks, and we have project Y coming up. I think we should put him in charge of the new project. Etc etc. You don't need silly metrics.
- ramtatatam 11y ago
  I think you missed the last sentence of my post.

sheepmullet 11y ago

> And that's precisely why number of tickets is just part of the story Hopefully one you are wise enough to keep to yourself :). I've seen so many problems even with the use of relatively sane metrics. > what would you suggest to use to all those folks who are building new team? Management, not metrics. At best you can use metrics as a rule of thumb to give you early indicators of possible issues. For a new team though you need to work together with them for a while to learn about their performance and capabilities. There is no other way. Perhaps one guy in your team is thoughtful and methodical and takes a week per issue but can solve complex issues, and another girl in your team can fly through half a dozen simpler issues in a week. That's actually the kind of diversity you want to encourage and it's something you can easily destroy if you consider #tickets closed an important metric. You should never mention metrics as a measure of performance with either your subordinates or your superiors. Your subordinates will work to the metrics rather than do what needs doing. And your superiors will start relying on the metrics instead of on your judgment. For example if you collect and use the #tickets solved per month as a metric then if you need to downsize your manager will say lets get rid of the people solving less than x tickets per month. Oh wait that includes some of your best people! Now you have an uphill battle, especially if you have used the #tickets closed as a reason to promote someone in your team. Edit: Basically the potential gains are minimal and the potential issues are numerous.

sheepmullet 11y ago

> you need to have some data supporting your story when you go to see the financial exec and negotiate rises. Dodgy metrics probably won't convince your exec either. If you are consistently building your team members capabilities then convincing the exec is easy. For example you can say Ben has solved complex cases A, B, and C in the last six months, and the work is clearly at a senior level but his pay doesn't reflect it. Lets fix it. Or: John has taken on supervision and mentoring tasks for Sam, Ben, and Steve, while still performing at a high level. He has mentioned to me in our one on ones that he wants to take on more leadership tasks, and we have project Y coming up. I think we should put him in charge of the new project. Etc etc. You don't need silly metrics.

ramtatatam 11y ago
I think you missed the last sentence of my post.