Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!haven.umd.edu!mimsy!cml From: cml@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Lott) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Subject: Re: use of metrics (was: Re: bridge building and discipline) Summary: use metrics to evaluate processes and products, not people Message-ID: <35121@mimsy.umd.edu> Date: 1 Jun 91 14:27:38 GMT References: <24527@unix.SRI.COM> <4707.284370a9@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> <795@tivoli.UUCP> Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu Distribution: na Organization: University of Maryland Dept of Computer Science Lines: 44 In some-article somebody (Kambic|hlavaty|Showalter) writes: > .... > a system where the metrics person is NOT the management chain - in fact, > it is forbidden for the metrics person to EVER reveal a specific name to a > management person. The reason is exactly as you describe - once anyone got > burned because of the metric data, the accuracy ... of data is shot In article <795@tivoli.UUCP> alan@tivoli.UUCP (Alan R. Weiss) writes: >Watts Humphrey is a very bright person, but its clear .... that >Watts never had to answer to the board of directors, stockholders, >or customers. I am working with a large set of data on developments right now, and am struggling with the analysis. The data isn't perfect, but my more experienced colleagues tell me that this data (from NASA, btw) is so much better than data sets at other institutions that I should just be happy. (don't worry, be hap...., um, sorry.) Quality of the data you collect is absolutely vital - or else you'll find yourself analyzing just plain garbage. The argument I'd like to make is that if you're going to put 2-5% of your project resources into data collection and validation, you better not shoot yourself in the foot right off by EVER using your metrics to evaluate your workers. (Here you might read ``punish'' for ``evaluate.'') It's naive to think that a group manager doesn't know already who are the stellar performers and who are already not so hot -- metrics, if they are given, will only confirm this knowledge. The point is that the metrics must NEVER be used as evaluatory tools FOR PEOPLE. This is the idea that management has to buy into (to use b-world jargon) before a metrics program can succeed. You want to use metrics to evaluate your processes and products, not your personnel. I also don't like Mr Weiss's statement that Mr Humphrey never had to answer to stockholders et al. Clearly the metrics person must justify that there will be some return on the metrics investment, o/w there's no point. The payback comes in the form of better awareness of your problem areas and in the eventual improvement in the way your shop does business. You can leave evaluations of personnel completely out of the picture - and should. chris... -- Christopher Lott \/ Dept of Comp Sci, Univ of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742 cml@cs.umd.edu /\ 4122 AV Williams Bldg 301 405-2721