I'm not sure this is true. I think there is an ROI on quality, but the incentives are set up not to value it. The problem is that "quality" - even "performanc

I'm not sure this is true. I think there is an ROI on quality, but the incentives are set up not to value it. The problem is that "quality" - even "performance" - is quite a nebulous, holistic property of the project as a whole. It doesn't fit neatly into a bullet-point of features which all link back to predefined OKRs for the product management team. It's also a nightmare to measure. One thing I've been banging on about at web teams I work with is to measure the relationship between time to first contentful paint against propensity to buy/click/watch/spend time-on-site/do whatever the relevant value metric is. For the analytics tooling that teams usually have in place, that's crossing two completely disconnected toolsets: you've got the behavioural analytics tools, which are typically owned by someone else in the business, and then you've got the technical observability tools, which are usually owned by the development team, and marrying the two up can be astonishingly hard to make happen.