"How efficient is a developer when producing things that are incorrect?" That software's users will use the product is the number one metric. They'll use it so

"How efficient is a developer when producing things that are incorrect?" That software's users will use the product is the number one metric. They'll use it so long as it achieves their goal with the reliability or security they tolerate. That often means it can be kind of flaky in terms of reliability. The security can be arbitrarily bad so long as they don't know it. Sometimes they'll still use the product if they know security is bad because they need it. That's the baseline. From there, developers have to decide what's most beneficial among investments in more features, enhancements of existing features, new products/activities, or enhancing quality/reliability/security. They usually choose against that last set. So, doing the other things with the minimum quality that's acceptable makes the most economic and social sense.