3 ms·

I don't think ownership (owning vs. working class) itself is the problem here. You can see similar behavior (hiding issues, lying about them) in any scenario i

I don't think ownership (owning vs. working class) itself is the problem here. You can see similar behavior (hiding issues, lying about them) in any scenario in which punishment is tied to the failure to meet the metrics. When the metric becomes the goal, people will game the metric in order to avoid punishment and/or reap the rewards. The only kind of measurement that doesn't cause this behavior is the neutral measurement - measurement which is guaranteed not to change the decisions directly, but only serve as information which is later used in high-level optimization of systemic processes. In context of software companies, it would mean that status reports should only be reviewed in combination to other factors, such as tool used, features implemented, deadlines tightened, etc., and only to further understand how to optimize the process to avoid human error. It's risky to implement that, because you have to trust your employees enough to say "you won't be fired because of your metrics, ever", but I believe it's less worse than having people falsely report good metrics.

whitemary 3y ago
In the real world, owners simply don't care about your enlightening idea. Why would they? And what are you gonna do about it when they don't?
- latency-guy2 3y ago
  Make my own. Just a reminder for you lefties but people are capable of creating things, many times it really doesn't take that much to do so, nor does getting rich in the process. Besides, why should anyone trust a leftist in power? We already know your lot will immediately outlaw and jail the opposition and pretend their uni-party system is "democratic". So I don't think you actually care about owners and power, you're just mad that you aren't in power perpetually.
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  I don't quite understand the context of this post. I was talking about metrics such as uptime percentage, not enlightening ideas. Can you explain what do you mean?
  - whitemary 3y ago
    That is fair, sorry. I'm just saying the boss is in charge at the end of the day. Regardless of any observations or knowledge contradictory to their practices, they ultimately retain all the power. Productivity (of something...) is ostensibly the intent of a capitalist venture, but the owner and ultimately prioritize anything they prefer. This is a problem for any hope of rational practice.
    - bheadmaster 3y ago
      > Productivity (of something...) is ostensibly the intent of a capitalist venture, but the owner and ultimately prioritize anything they prefer. This is a problem for any hope of rational practice. While that is true, the whole argument against metrics as goals is that they decrease productivity, which goes against a common interest of both capitalist and communist societies. Productivity as a goal simply makes sense in the real world, regardless of whether there's an owner who is chasing profit, or a worker collective who has to meet their planned quota for the planned economy. The state of facts is such that binding metrics to rewards is harmful to their overall reliability, regardless of which economic system it's happening in.
bentcorner 3y ago
I think you also need to set up an "adversarial" organization. Have a team responsible for reporting metrics that is distinct from the team that is responsible for software that drive the metrics. Classic Dev/QA partnership.
- ethbr0 3y ago
  The US military essentially landed on a similar solution. - Regularly rotate personnel - Reward review by a random board The rotations prevent cooperation of "adversarial" parties from corrupting the process. A review based on a blend of quantitative metrics (basics/table stakes) and qualitative metrics (everything else) prevents quantitative-metrics-gaming from dominating. The system has a ton of flaws, is inefficient, and produces suboptimal outcomes a fair amount of the time, but damned if it doesn't scale.
JadeNB 3y ago
> When the metric becomes the goal, people will game the metric in order to avoid punishment and/or reap the rewards. Goodhart's law!
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  Exactly. I always forget its name tho. The book "The Tyranny of Metrics" by Jerry Muller talks about this phenomenon in depth, giving many historical examples of metrics making systems worse instead of better. Very good read, I'd recommend it to anyone.
  - JadeNB 3y ago
    > Exactly. I always forget its name tho. Me too! Fortunately, Google was smart enough to turn it up from "law about metrics". > The book "The Tyranny of Metrics" by Jerry Muller talks about this phenomenon in depth, giving many historical examples of metrics making systems worse instead of better. Very good read, I'd recommend it to anyone. Thanks! I'll have a look.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

whitemary 3y ago

In the real world, owners simply don't care about your enlightening idea. Why would they? And what are you gonna do about it when they don't?

latency-guy2 3y ago
Make my own. Just a reminder for you lefties but people are capable of creating things, many times it really doesn't take that much to do so, nor does getting rich in the process. Besides, why should anyone trust a leftist in power? We already know your lot will immediately outlaw and jail the opposition and pretend their uni-party system is "democratic". So I don't think you actually care about owners and power, you're just mad that you aren't in power perpetually.
bheadmaster 3y ago
I don't quite understand the context of this post. I was talking about metrics such as uptime percentage, not enlightening ideas. Can you explain what do you mean?
- whitemary 3y ago
  That is fair, sorry. I'm just saying the boss is in charge at the end of the day. Regardless of any observations or knowledge contradictory to their practices, they ultimately retain all the power. Productivity (of something...) is ostensibly the intent of a capitalist venture, but the owner and ultimately prioritize anything they prefer. This is a problem for any hope of rational practice.
  - bheadmaster 3y ago
    > Productivity (of something...) is ostensibly the intent of a capitalist venture, but the owner and ultimately prioritize anything they prefer. This is a problem for any hope of rational practice. While that is true, the whole argument against metrics as goals is that they decrease productivity, which goes against a common interest of both capitalist and communist societies. Productivity as a goal simply makes sense in the real world, regardless of whether there's an owner who is chasing profit, or a worker collective who has to meet their planned quota for the planned economy. The state of facts is such that binding metrics to rewards is harmful to their overall reliability, regardless of which economic system it's happening in.

bentcorner 3y ago

I think you also need to set up an "adversarial" organization. Have a team responsible for reporting metrics that is distinct from the team that is responsible for software that drive the metrics. Classic Dev/QA partnership.

ethbr0 3y ago
The US military essentially landed on a similar solution. - Regularly rotate personnel - Reward review by a random board The rotations prevent cooperation of "adversarial" parties from corrupting the process. A review based on a blend of quantitative metrics (basics/table stakes) and qualitative metrics (everything else) prevents quantitative-metrics-gaming from dominating. The system has a ton of flaws, is inefficient, and produces suboptimal outcomes a fair amount of the time, but damned if it doesn't scale.

JadeNB 3y ago

> When the metric becomes the goal, people will game the metric in order to avoid punishment and/or reap the rewards. Goodhart's law!

bheadmaster 3y ago
Exactly. I always forget its name tho. The book "The Tyranny of Metrics" by Jerry Muller talks about this phenomenon in depth, giving many historical examples of metrics making systems worse instead of better. Very good read, I'd recommend it to anyone.
- JadeNB 3y ago
  > Exactly. I always forget its name tho. Me too! Fortunately, Google was smart enough to turn it up from "law about metrics". > The book "The Tyranny of Metrics" by Jerry Muller talks about this phenomenon in depth, giving many historical examples of metrics making systems worse instead of better. Very good read, I'd recommend it to anyone. Thanks! I'll have a look.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]