In the first session of the ‘Unlocking Engineering Productivity’ webinar series, host Kovid Batra from Typo welcomes two prominent engineering leaders: Paulo André, CTO of Resquared, and Denis Čahuk, a technical coach and TDD/DDD expert.

‍

‍

They discuss the importance of engineering productivity and share insights about their journeys. Paulo emphasizes the significance of collaboration in software development and the pitfalls of focusing solely on individual productivity metrics. Denis highlights the value of consistent improvement and reliability over individual velocity. Both guests underline the importance of creating clarity and making work visible within teams to enhance productivity. Audience questions address topics such as balancing technical debt with innovation and integrating new tools without disrupting workflows. Overall, the session offers practical strategies for engineering leaders to build effective and cohesive teams.

Timestamps

• 00:00 — Introduction

• 00:52 — Meet the Experts: Paulo and Denis

• 03:13 — Childhood Stories that Shaped Careers

• 05:37 — Defining Engineering Productivity

• 11:18 — Why Focus on Engineering Productivity Now?

• 15:47 — When and How to Measure Productivity

• 22:00 — Team vs. Individual Productivity

• 35:35 — Real-World Examples and Insights

• 37:17 — Addressing Common Engineering Challenges

• 38:34 — The Importance of Team Reliability

• 40:32 — Planning and Execution Strategies

• 45:31 — Creating Clarity and Competence

• 53:24 — Audience Q&A: Balancing Technical Debt and Innovation

• 57:02 — Audience Q&A: Overlooked Metrics and Security

• 01:02:49 — Audience Q&A: Integrating New Tools and Frameworks

• 01:08:47 — Final Thoughts and Farewell

Links and Mentions

• Paulo André on Linkedin

• Denis Čahuk on Linkedin

• Kovid Batra on Linkedin

• Watch this webinar on YouTube and Substack

• Listen on Spotify, Amazon Music, and iTunes/Apple Podcasts

Transcript

Kovid Batra: All right. Time to get started. Uh, welcome everyone. Welcome to the first episode, first session of our new, all new webinar series, Unlocking Engineering Productivity. So after the success of our previous webinar The Hows and Whats of DORA, we are even more excited to bring you this webinar series which is totally designed to help the engineering leaders become better, learn more and build successful, impactful dev teams. And today with us, uh, we have two passionate engineering leaders. Uh, I have known them for a while now. They have been super helpful, all the time up for helping us out. So let me start with the introduction. Uh, Paulo, Paulo André, uh, CTO of Resquared, a YC-backed startup. He has been the, he has been ex-engineering leadership coach for Hotjar, and he has, he’s an author of the Hagakure newsletter. So welcome to, welcome to the unlocking, uh, engineering productivity webinar, Paulo.

Paulo André: Thanks for having me. It’s a real pleasure to be here.

Kovid Batra: Great. Uh, then we have Denis. Uh, he’s coming to this for the second time. And, uh, Denis is a tech leadership coach, TDD expert, and author of Crafting Tech Teams. And he’s also a guitar player, a professional gamer. Uh, hi, hi, Denis. Welcome, welcome to the episode.

Denis Čahuk: Hi, thanks for inviting me again. Always a pleasure. And Hey, Paulo, it’s our first time meeting on stage.

Paulo André: Good to meet you, Denis.

Kovid Batra: I think I missed mentioning one thing about Paulo. Like, uh, he is like a very, uh, he’s an avid book reader and a coffee lover, just like me. So on that note, Paulo, uh, which book you’re reading these days?

Paulo André: Oh, that’s a good question. Let, let me pull up my, because I’m always reading a bunch of them at the same time, sort of. So right now, I’m very interested, I wonder why in, you know, geopolitical topics. So I’m reading a lot about, you know, superpowers and how this has played out, uh, in history. I’m also reading a fiction book from an author called David Baldacci. It’s this series that I recommend everyone who likes to read thrillers and stuff like that. It’s called the 6:20 Man. So.

Kovid Batra: Great.

Paulo André: That’s what I’m reading right now.

Kovid Batra: So what’s going to be the next superpower then? Is it, is it, is it China, Russia coming in together or it’s the USA?

Paulo André: I’ll tell you offline. I’ll tell you offline.

Kovid Batra: All right. All right. Let’s get started then. Um, I think before actually we move on to the main section, uh, there is one ritual that we have to follow every time so that our audience gets to know you a little more. Uh, this is my favorite question. So I think I’ll, I’ll start with Paulo, you once again. Uh, you have to tell us something from your childhood or from teenage, uh, that defines you, who you are today. So over to you.

Paulo André: I mean, you already talked about the books. I think the reason why I became such a book lover was because there were a ton of books in my house, even though my parents were not readers. So I don’t know, it was more decorative. But I think more importantly for this conversation, I think the one thing about my childhood was when they gifted me a computer when I was six years old. We’re talking about 88, 89 of the type that you still connected to your big TV in the living room. So that changed my life because it came with an instruction manual that had code listings. Then you could type it in and you can see what happens on the screen and the rest is history. So I think that was definitely the most consequential thing that happened in my childhood when you consider how my life and career has played out.

Kovid Batra: Definitely. Cool. Um, Denis, I think the same question to you, man. Uh, what, what has been that childhood teenage memory that has been defining you today?

Denis Čahuk: Oh, you’re putting me on the spot here. I’ll have to come up with a new story every time I join a new webinar. Uh, no, no, I had a similar experience as Paulo. Um, I have an older brother and our household got our first computer when I was five-six years old, first commodore 64. So I learned how to code before I could read. Uh, I knew, I knew what keys to press so I could load Donald Duck into the, into the TV. Um, yeah, other than that when I, when I got a little bit, you know into the teenage years, I, um, World of Warcraft and playing games online became my passion project when I, when I received access to the internet. Um, so that’s, you know, I played World of Warcraft professionally, semi-professionally for quite a few years, like almost an entire decade, you know, and that, that was sort of parallel with my, with my sort of tech career, because we’re usually doing it in a very large organization, game-wise. Yeah. And that, that, that had a huge influence because it gave me an outlet for my competitiveness.

Kovid Batra: That’s interesting. All right, guys. Thanks. Thanks for sharing this with us. Uh, I think we’ll now move on to the main section and discuss something around which our audience would love to learn from you both. Uh, so let’s, let’s start with the first basic fundamental definition of what productivity, what dev productivity or engineering productivity looks like to you. So Paulo, would you like to take this first? Like, how do you define productivity?

Paulo André: So you start with a very small question, right? Um, you actually start with a million-dollar question. What is productivity? I’m happy to take a stab at it, but I think it’s one of those things that everyone has their own definition. For what it’s worth, when I think about productivity of engineering teams, I cannot decouple it from the purpose of an engineering team. And then ultimately, the way I see it is that an engineering team serves a business and serves the users of that business in case it’s a product company, obviously, um, but any, any kind of company kind of has that as the delivery of value, right? So with that in mind, is this team doing their part in the delivery of value, whatever value is for that business and for those users, right? And so having that sort of frame in mind, I also break it down in my mind, at least, in terms of like winning right now and increasing our capacity to win in the future. So a productive team is not just a team that delivers today, but it’s also a team that is getting better and better at delivering tomorrow, right? And so productivity would be, are we doing what it takes to deliver that value regardless of the output? Um, it is necessary to have output to have results and outcomes, but at the end of the day, how are we contributing to the outcomes rather than to the, um, the just purely to the outputs? And the reason why I bring this up has to do obviously with sometimes you see the obsession about things like story points and you know, all of that stuff that ultimately you can be working a lot, but achieving very little or nothing at all. So, yeah, I would never decouple, um, the delivery of value from how well an engineering team is doing.

Kovid Batra: Perfect. I think very well framed here and the perspective makes a lot of sense. Um, by the way, uh, audience, uh, while we are talking, discussing this EP, please feel free to shoot out all the questions that you have in the comments section. We’ll definitely be taking them at the end of the session. Uh, but it would be great if you could just throw in questions right now. Well, this was an advice from Denis, so I wouldn’t want to forget this. Okay. Uh, I think coming back, Denis, what’s your take on, uh, productivity, engineering productivity, dev productivity?

Denis Čahuk: Well, aPauloal said, that’s a million dollar question. I think, I think coming from a, from like a more analytical perspective, more data-driven perspective, I think we like to use the, the financial analogies, metaphors a lot for things like technical debt and, you know, good story points. It’s all about estimating something, you know, value of something or, or scale of something, scope of something. I think just using two metaphors is very useful for productivity. One is, you know, how risky is the team itself? And risk can come from many different places. It can be their methodologies, their personalities, the age of the company, the maturity of the company. The project can be risky. The timing on the market can be risky, right? So, but there is an inherent risk coming from the team itself. That’s, that’s what I mean. So how risky is it to work with this team in particular? Uh, and the other thing is to what degree does the team reason about, um, “I will produce this output for this outcome.” versus “I need to fill my schedule with activity because this input is demanded of me.” Right? So if I, if I use the four pillars that you probably know from business model canvases for activity, input, output, outcome, um, a productive team would not be measuring productivity per se. They will be more aligned with their business, aligned with their product and focusing on what, which of their outputs can provide what kind of outcomes for the business, right? So it’s not so much about measuring it or discussing it. It’s more about a, you know, are we shifting our mentality far enough into the things that matter, or are we chasing our own tail, essentially, um, protecting our calendars and making sure we didn’t over-promise or under-promise, etc.?

Kovid Batra: Got it. Makes sense.

Paulo André: Can I just add one, one last thing here, because Denis got my, my brain kinda going? Um, just to make the point that I think the industry spends a lot of time thinking about what is productivity and trying to define productivity. I think there is value in really getting clear about what productivity is not. And so I think what both Denis and I are definitely aligned on among other things is that it’s not output. That’s not what productivity is in isolation. So output is necessary, but it is not sufficient. And unfortunately, a lot of these conversations end up being purely about output because it’s easy to measure and because it’s easy to measure, that’s where we stop. And so we need to do the homework and measure what’s hard as well, so we can get to the real insight.

Kovid Batra: No, totally makes sense. I think I relate to this because when I talk to so many engineering leaders and almost all the time this, this comes into discussion, like how exactly they should be doing it. But what, what is becoming more interesting for me is that this million dollar question has suddenly started raising concerns, right? I mean, almost everywhere in like in business, uh, people are measuring productivity in some or the other way, right? But somehow engineering teams have suddenly come into the focus. So this, this perspective of bringing more focus now, why do you think it has come into the picture now?

Paulo André: Is that for me or Denis? Who should go first?

Kovid Batra: Anyone. Maybe Paulo, you can go ahead. No problem.

Paulo André: Okay. So, look. In, in my opinion, I think I was thinking a little bit about this. I think it’s a good question. And I think there’s at least three things, three main things that are kind of conspiring for this renewed focus or double down on engineering productivity specifically. I think on the one hand, it’s what I already mentioned, right? It’s easier to measure engineering than anything else. Um, at least in the product design and engineering world, of course, sales are very easy to measure. Did you close or not? And that sort of thing. But when it comes to product design and engineering, engineering, especially if you focus on outputs is so much easier to measure. And then someone gets a good sense of ROI from that, which may or may not be accurate. But I think that’s one of the things. The other thing is that when times get more lean or things get more difficult and funding kind of dries up, um, then, of course, you need to tighten the belt and where are you going to tighten the belt? And at the end of the day, I always say this to my teams, like, engineering is not more special in any way than any other team in a company. That being said, when it comes to a software company, the engineering team is where the rubber meets the road. In other words, you do absolutely need some degree of engineering team or engineering capacity to translate ideas and designs and so on into actual software. So it’s very easy to kind of just look at it as in, “Oh, engineers are absolutely critical. Everything else, maybe are nice to have.” Or something of that, to that effect, right? And then lastly, I think the so-called Elon Musk effect definitely is a thing. I mean, when someone with that prominence and with, you know, the soapbox that he has, comes in and says, you know, we’re going to focus on engineers and it’s about builders and even Mark Andreessen wrote an article like three years ago or so saying it’s time to build, all of that speaks like engineering, engineering, engineering. Um, and so when you put that all together and how influencible all of us are, but I think especially then founders and CEOs are kind of really attuned to their industry and to investors and so on, and I think there’s this, um, feedback loop where engineering is where it’s at right now, especially the age of AI and so on. So yeah, i’m not surprised that when you put this all together in this day and age, we have what we have in terms of engineering being like the holy grail and the focus.

Kovid Batra: Uh, Denis, you, you have something to add on this?

Denis Čahuk: I mean, when it comes to the timing, I don’t think anything comes to mind, you know, why now? What I can definitely say is that engineering of everything that’s going on is the biggest cost in a, in a large company. I mean, it’s not, not to say that it’s all about salaries or operational expenses, but it is also from a business’s perspective, engineering is, you know, if I put a price to the business being wrong on an experiment, the engineering side of things, the product engineering side of things defines most of that cost, right? So when it comes to experiments, the likelihood of it succeeding or not succeeding, or the how fast you gain feedback to be able to, you know, to, to think of experiment feedback as cashflow, you know, you want the big bet that you do once every three months, or do you want to do a bunch of small bets continuously several times per day? You know, all of that is decided and all of that happens in engineering and it also happens to be the biggest fiscal costs. So it makes sense that, hey, there’s an, you know, there’s a big thing that costs a lot, that is very complex and it’s defining the company. Yeah, of course, business owners would want to measure it. It will be irresponsible not to. It doesn’t mean that it, that productivity from a team’s or an engineer’s, an individual’s perspective is the most sensible thing to measure. But I, you know, I understand the people that would intuitively come to that conclusion.

Kovid Batra: Yeah. I think that makes a lot of sense. And what do you think, like, this should be done that, that is totally, uh, understandable, but when is the right time to start doing this and how one should start it? Because every time our engineering leader is held accountable for a team, whether big or small, there is a point where you have to decide your priorities and think about things that you are going to do, right? So how and when should an engineering leader or an engineering manager for a team should start taking up this journey?

Paulo André: I think Denis can go first on this one.

Denis Čahuk: Well, I would never, you know, I would never start measuring. So I coach teams professionally, you know, they, they reach out to me because something about my communication on LinkedIn or newsletter resonated with them regarding, you know, a very no-nonsense way of how to deal with customers, how to communicate, how to plan, how to not plan, how to, how to bring, you know, that excitement into engineering, that makes engineering very hyperproductive and fun. And then they come to me and ask, well, you know, “I want to measure all these things to see what I can do.” I think that context is always misleading. You know, we don’t just go in, you know, it’s not a speedometer like the, I think the very, very first intuition that people still have from the 90s, from the, from the, like the initial scrum and Kanban, um, modes of thought that, “Oh, I can just put up speedometer on the team and it will have a velocity and it, you know, it will just be a number.” Um, I think that is naive. That is not what measuring is. And that is not the right time ever to measure that. Like that I think is my say. Um, the right time to measure is when you say, “I am improving A or B. I am consciously trying to figure out continuously, consciously trying to figure out what will make my teams better.” So a leader might approach, “Okay. If I introduce this initiative, how can I tell if things are better?” And then you can say, “Well, I’ll eyeball it or I’ll survey the team.” And at a certain point, the eyeballing is too inaccurate or it requires too many disagreeing eyeballs, or, um, you run the risk of a survey fatiguing the team, so it’s just way too many surveys asking boring questions, and when you ask engineers to do repetitive, boring things, they will start giving you nonsense answers, right? So that would be the point where I think measuring makes sense, right? Where you basically take a little bit of subjective opinion out, with the exception of surveys, qualitative surveys, and you introduce a machine that says, “Hey, this is a process.” You know, it’s one computer talking to the other computer, you know, in the case of GitHub and similar, which seems to be the primary vector for measurement. Um, can I just extract some metrics of, you know, what are the characteristics of the machine? It doesn’t tell you how fast or how slow it’s going. Just what are the characteristics? Maybe I can get some insights too and decide whether this was a good idea or a bad idea, or if we’re missing something. But the decision to help your teams improve on some initiative and introducing the initiative comes first. And then you measure if you have no other alternative or if the alternatives are way too fuzzy.

Kovid Batra: Makes sense. Paulo, would you like to add something?

Paulo André: Yeah, I mean, I think my, my perspective on this is not very different from, from Denis. Uh, maybe it comes from a slightly different angle and I’ll explain what I mean. So, at the end of the day, if you want to create an outcome, right? And you want to change customer behavior, you want to create results for the business, you’re going to have to build something. And where I would not start is with the metrics, right? So you asked Kovid, like where, where do we start in this journey? I would say do not start with the metrics because in my mind, the metrics are a source of insight or answers to a set of questions. And so start with the questions, right? Start with the challenges that we, that you have to get to where you want to be, right? And so, coming back to what I was saying, if you want to create value, you’re going to have to build something, typically, most of the time, sometimes it creates value by removing something, but in general, you are building and iterating on your products. And, and so with that in mind, what is going back to first principles? What is the nature of software development? Well, it’s a collaborative effort. Nobody does everything end-to-end by themselves. And so with that in mind, there’s going to be handoffs. There’s going to be collaboration. There’s going to be all, all of that sort of flow, right? Where, where the work goes through a certain, you can see it as a pipeline. And so then when it comes to productivity, to me is, is, you know, from a lean software development perspective is how do we increase the flow? If you think of a Kanban board, how do you go, you know, in a smooth way, as smooth as possible from left to right, from something being ready for development to being shipped in production and creating value for the user and for the company? And so if you see it that way with that mental model, then it becomes like, where is the constraint? What is the bottleneck? And then how do we measure that? How do we get the answers is by measuring. And so when it comes to the DORA metrics that you guys obviously with Typo provide, um, you know, a good, good insight into, and, and other such things, generally cycle time, lead time really allows us to start understanding where’s this getting stuck. And that leads to then conversations around what can we do about that? And ultimately everybody can rally around the idea of how do we increase flow? And so that’s where I would start is what are we trying to do? What is getting in our way? And then let’s look at the data that we have available without going too crazy about that into like, what can we learn and where can we improve and where’s the biggest leverage?

Kovid Batra: Makes sense. I think one, one good point that you brought here is that software development is a collaborative effort, right? And every time when we go about doing that, there are people, there are teams, uh, there are processes, right? Uh, how, how would you define in a situation that whether you should go about measuring, uh, at an individual-level productivity, a developer-level productivity, and, uh, and then when, when we are talking about this collaborative effort, the engineering productivity? So how do you differentiate and how do you make sure that you are measuring things right? And sometimes the terminologies also bring in a lot of confusion. Uh, like, I would never perceive developer productivity to be something, uh, specific to developers. It ultimately boils down to the team. So I would want to hear both of you on this point, like how, how do you differentiate or what’s your perspective on that? When you talk to your team that, okay, this is what we are going to measure, uh, your teams are not taken aback by that, and there is a smooth transition of thought, goals when we are talking about improving the productivity. Uh, Paulo, maybe you could answer that.

Paulo André: I was trying to unmute myself. I was actually gonna.. Um, and then it feels free to kind of like interject at any point with your thinking as well. You know, if I follow up on what I was just saying that this is a team sport, then the unit of value is going to be the team. Are there individual productivity metrics? Yes. Are they insightful? Yes, they can be. But for what end? What can you actually infer from them? What can you learn from them? Personally, as an engineering leader, the way I look at individual productivity metrics is more like a smoke alarm. So, for example, if someone is not pushing code for long periods of time, that’s a question. Like, what’s going on? There might be some very good reasons for that, or maybe this person is struggling and so I’m glad that I saw that in the, in the metrics, right? And then we can have a conversation around it. Again, the individual is necessary, but it’s not sufficient to deliver value. And so I need to focus on the team-level productivity metrics, right? Um, so that’s, that’s kind of like how I disambiguate, if you will, this, these two, like the individual and the team, the team comes first. I look at the individual to understand to what degree is the individual or the individuals serving the team, because it comes back to also questions, obviously, of performance and, and performance reviews and compensation and promotions, like all of that stuff, right? Um, but do I look at the metrics to decide on that? Personally, I don’t. What I do look at is what can I see in the metrics in terms of what this person’s contribution to the team is and for the team to be able to be successful and productive.

Kovid Batra: Got it. Denis, uh, you have something to add here?

Denis Čahuk: It’s, it’s such an interesting topic that sort of has nuances from many different perspectives that my brain just wants to talk about all three at the same time. So I want to sort of approach every, like, do a quick dip into all three areas. First is the business side, right? So, uh, for example, let’s take a, let’s take the examples of baseball and soccer. Um, off, when off season comes for baseball. Baseball is more of an individual sport than soccer, you know, like the individual performance stands out way more than in soccer when everything’s moving all the time. Um, it’s, it’s very difficult to individuate performance in soccer, although you still can and people still do and it’s still very sexy. Um, when it’s off season, people want to decide, okay, which players do we keep? Which players do we trade? Which players do we replace? You know, this is completely normal, and you would want to do this, and you would want to have some kind of metrics, ideally, merit-based metrics of, yeah, this person performed better. Having this person on the team makes the team better. In baseball, this makes perfect sense. In soccer, not so much, but you still have to decide, well, how much do we pay each player? And you can probably tell if you’re following the scene that every soccer player is being, you know, their salary, their, their, um, their contracts are priced individually based on their value to the brand of the team, all the way to public relations, marketing, and yes, performance on, on the field. Even if they’re on the bench all the time, you know, they might have a positive effect on the team as a coach or as a mentor, as a captain. Um, so if you did bring that into that, that’s one aspect. So now bringing it back into software teams, that’s the business side of things. Yes, these decisions have to be made.

Then there’s the other side of things, which is how does the team work? You know, from my perspective, if output or outcomes can be traced back to one individual person, I think there’s something wrong. I think there’s a lot of sort of value left on the table if you can say, “Oh, this thing was done by this one person.” Generally, it’s a team effort and the more complex the problems get, the harder it is, you know, look, look, for example, NASA, um, the Apollo missions. Which one engineer, you know, made the rocket fly? You don’t have an answer to that because it was thousands of people collaborating together. You know, which one person made a movie? Yes, the director or the producer or the main actor, like they are, they stand out when it comes to branding. But there were tens of thousands of people involved, right? So like to, you know, at the end of the day, what matters is the box office. So I think that that’s what it really comes down to, uh, is that yes, generally there will be like a few stars and some smoke alarms, as Paulo mentioned, I really liked that analogy, right? So you’re sort of checking for, hey, is anybody below standard and does anybody sort of stand out? Usually in branding and communication, not in technical skill. Um, and then try to reason about the team as a whole.

And then there’s the third aspect, which is how productive does the individual feel? You know, how productive, if somebody says they’re a senior with seven years of experience, how productive they, do they feel? Do they get to do everything they wanted to in a day? You know, and then keep going up. Does the product owner feel productive or efficient? Or does the leader feel that they’re supporting their teams enough, right? So it also comes down to perception. We saw this recently with the usages and various surveys regarding AI usage and coding assistance, where developers say, “Yeah, it makes me feel amazing because I feel more productive.” But in reality, the outcomes that it produces didn’t change, or it was so insignificant that it was very difficult to measure.

So with those three sort of three angles to consider, I would say, you know, the way to approach measuring and particularly this individual versus team performance, is that it’s a moving target. You sort of need to have a plan for why you’re measuring and what you’re measuring and ideally, once you know that you’re measuring the right things when it comes to the business, it’ll be very difficult, um, to trace it back to an individual. If tracing it back to an individual is very easy, or if that’s an outcome that you’re pursuing, I would say there’s other issues or potential improvements afoot. And again, measuring those might show you that measuring them is a wrong, is a bad idea.

Paulo André: Can I just add one, one quick thing again? Like, this is something that took me a little while to understand for myself and to become intuitive, which is not intuitive at all. Um, but I think it’s an important pitfall to kind of highlight, which is if we incentivize individual behaviors, individual productivity, that can really backfire on the team. And again, I remind you that the team is the unit of value. And so if we incentivize throughput or output from individual developers, how does that hurt the team? It doesn’t sound very intuitive, but if you think about, for example, a very prolific developer that is constantly just taking on more tickets and creating more pull requests, and those pull requests are just piling up because there’s no capacity in the team to review them, the customer is not getting any value on the other side. That work in progress is just in lean terminology. It’s just waste at that point, right? But that developer can be regarded depending on how you look at it as a very productive developer, but is it? Or could it be that that developer could be testing something? Or could it be that that developer is helping doing code reviews and so on and so forth, right? So again, the team and individual productivity can lead to wildly different results. And sometimes you have teams that are very unproductive despite having very productive developers in them, but they are looking at the wrong, sort of, in my opinion, wrong definition of what productivity is and where it comes from, and what the unit of value is, like I said, it’s the team.

Kovid Batra: Yeah.

Denis Čahuk: Can I jump in quickly, Kovid?

Kovid Batra: Yeah.

Denis Čahuk: There’s something I’ve always said. Um, it’s very unintuitive, and I can give you a complete example from coaching, that it throws leaders off-guard every time I suggest it, and it ends up being a very positive outcome. I always ask them, you know, “What are you using to assign tickets? Are you assigning them?” And they say, “Yes, we use Jira.” Or something equivalent. And I tell them, And I ask them, “Well, have you considered not assigning the tickets?” Right? And, well, who should own it? And I say, “Well, it’s in the team’s backlog. The team owns it. Stop assigning an individual.” Right? And they’re like, and they’re usually taken aback. It’s like, “What do you mean? Like, it won’t get done if I don’t assign it.” No, it’s in the team’s backlog, of course it’ll get done. Right? And if not, if they can’t decide who will do it, then that’s a conversation they should have, and then keep it unassigned. Or, alternatively, use some kind of software that allows multiple people to be assigned. But you don’t need to, because the moment you start, you know, Jira, for example, had like a full activity log, so I comment on it, you comment on it, you review, I review, we merge, I merge, I ask a question. You have a full paper trail of everybody who was involved. Why would you need an owner, right? So this idea of an owner is, again, going back to lean activities and talking about handoffs, right? So I hand it off to you, you’re now the owner, and you’ll hand it off to somebody else. Well, and, but having many handoffs is an anti-pattern in itself, usually in most contexts. Actually the better idea would be, how can we have less people than we have? How can we have less handoffs then we have people? If there are seven people in the pipeline, there shouldn’t be seven handoffs, you know, how can we have just one deliverable, just one thing to assign and seven people working on it? That would be the best sort of positive outcome because then you don’t cap, you know, how much money you can put around a problem because that allows you to sort of scale your efforts in intensity, not just in parallelism. Um, and usually that parallelism comes at a very, very steep cost.

Paulo André: Yeah.

Denis Čahuk: Um, so incentivizing methods to make individual work activity untraceable can unintuitively have, and usually does, drastic and immediate positive, positive benefits for the team. Also, if the team is lacking in psychological safety, this will make it immediately sort of washed over them and they’ll have to have some like really rough conversations in the first week and then things drastically start improving. At least that’s my experience.

Paulo André: Yeah. And the handoff piece is a very interesting one. I’ll be very quick, uh, Kovid. When we think about the perspective of a piece of work, a work package, a ticket or whatever, it’s either being actively worked on or it’s waiting for someone to do something about it, right? And if we measure these things, what we, what we realize, and it’s the same thing if you go to the airport and we think about how often, how much time are we actually spending on something like checking in or boarding the plane versus waiting at some of the stages, the waiting time is typically way more than the active time. And so that waiting time is waste as well. That’s an opportunity. Those delays, we can think about how can we reduce those and the more handoffs we have in the process, the more opportunity for delay creeps in, right? So it’s, it’s a very different way of looking at things. But sometimes when I say estimates and so on, estimates is all about like active time. It’s how long it’s going to take, but we don’t realize that nothing is done individually, and because of the handoffs, you cannot possibly predict the waiting times. So the best that you can do is to reduce the handoffs, so you have less opportunity for those delays to creep in.

Kovid Batra: Totally. I think to summarize both of your points, I would have understood is that making those smoke alarms ready at individual level and at process level also ready so that you are able to understand those gaps if there is something falling apart. But at the end of the day, if you’re measuring productivity for a team, it has to be a collaborative team-level thing that you’re looking at and looking at value delivery. So I think it’s a very interesting thing. Uh, I think there’s a lot of learning for us when we are working at Typo that we need to think more on the angle of how we bring in those pointers, those metrics which work as those smoke alarms, rather than just looking at individual efficiency or productivity and defining that for somebody. Uh, I think that, that makes a lot of sense. All right. I think we are into a very interesting conversation and I would like to ask one of you to tell us something from your experience. So let’s start with you, Denis. Um, like you have been coaching a lot of teams, right? And, uh, there, there are instances where you deal with large-scale teams, small teams, startups, right? There are different combinations. Anything that you feel is an interesting experience to share here about how a team approached solving a particular problem or a bottleneck in their team that was slowing them down, basically like not having the right impact that they wanted to, and what did they do about it? And then how, how they arrived to the goal that they were looking at?

Denis Čahuk: Well, I can, I can list many. I’ll, I’ll focus on two. One is, generally the team knows what’s the problem. Generally, the team knows already, hey, yeah, we don’t have enough tests, or, ah, yeah, we keep missing deadlines, or our relationship with stakeholders is very bad, and they just communicate with us through, you know, strict roadmaps and strict deadlines and strict expectations. Um, that’s a problem to be solved. That’s not, you know, it doesn’t have to be that way. So if you know what the problem is, there’s no point measuring, because there’s no, there’s no further insight to be gained that, yeah, this is a problem, but hey, let’s get distracted with this insight. No, like, you know what the problem is, you can just decide what to do, and then if you need help along the way, maybe measurements would help. Or maybe measurements on an organizational level would help, not, not just engineering. Um, or you bring on a coach to sort of help you, you know, gain clarity. That’s one aspect. If you know what the problem is, you don’t need to measure. Usually people ask me, Denis, what should I measure? Should I introduce DORA metrics? And I usually tell them, Oh, what’s the main problem? What’s the problem this week? Oh yeah, a lot of PRs are waiting around and we’re not writing enough tests. Okay, that’s actionable. Like, that’s enough. Like, do you want more? Like, but do you need a bigger problem? Because then you just, you know, spend a lot of time looking for a problem that you wish was bigger than that so that you wouldn’t have to, right, because that’s just resistance that just either your ego or trying to play it safe or trying to put it into the next quarter when maybe there’s less stress and right, there isn’t. That’s one aspect.

The other aspect, you know, this idea of.. How did you phrase it? An approach that works that aren’t generally approaches that work. You know, I always say that everything we do is nowadays basically a proxy to eliminating handoffs, right? Getting the engineers very close to the customer and, um, you know, getting closer to continuous delivery. Continuous integration at the very minimum, but continuous delivery, right? So that when software is ready, it’s releasable on demand, and there isn’t like this long waiting that Paolo mentioned earlier, right? Like this is just a general form of waste. Um, but potentially something that both of these cases handle unintuitively that I like to bring in as a sort of more qualitative metric is, um, the reliability of the team. You know, we like to measure the reliability of systems and the whole Scrum movement introduced this idea of velocity, and I like to bring in this idea of, let’s say you want to be on time as a leader. Um, I’m interested in proving the theory that, hey, if you want to be on time, you probably need to be on time every week, and in order to be on time on the week, you probably need to be on time every day. So if you don’t know what an on-time day looks like, there’s no point planning roadmaps and saying that deadlines are a primary focus. Maybe the team should be planning in smaller batches, not with, not trying to chase higher accuracy in something very large. And what I usually use as a proxy metric is just to say, how risky is your word? Right, so how reliable is your promise? Uh, and we don’t measure how fast the team is moving. What I like to measure with them is say, okay, when do you think this will be done? They say Friday. Okay. If you’re right, Monday needs to look like this. Tuesday needs to look like this. Let me just try to reverse engineer it from that. It’s very basic. And then I’m trying to figure out how many days or hours or minutes into a plan they’re off-track. I don’t care about velocity. So no proxy metrics. I’m just interested if they create like a three month roadmap, how many hours into the three-month roadmap are they off-course? Because that’s what I’m interested in, because that’s actionable. Okay. You said three months from now, this is done. One month from now, there’ll be a milestone. But yesterday you said that today something would be done. It’s not done. Maybe we should work on that. Maybe we should really get down to a much smaller batch size and just try to make the communication structures around the team building stuff more reliable. That would de-stress a lot of people at the same time and sort of reduce anxiety. And maybe the problem is that you have a building-to-deploying nuance and maybe that’s also part of the problem. It usually is. And then there might be a planning-to-building nuance that also needs to be addressed. And then we basically come down to this idea of continuous delivery extreme programming, you know, let’s plan a little bit. Let’s Build a little bit. Let’s test it. Let’s test our assumptions. And behind the scenes once we do that for a few days, once we have evidence that we’re reliable, then let’s plan the next two weeks. Only when we have shown evidence of the team understands what a reliable work week for them looks like. If they’ve never experienced that and they’ve been chasing their own tail deadline after deadline, um, there’s not much you can do with such a team. And a lot of people just need a wake up call to see that, “Hey, you know what? I actually don’t know how to plan. You know, I don’t know how to estimate.” And that’s okay. As long as you have this intention of trying to improve or trying to look for alternatives, not to become better.

Kovid Batra: I think my next question would be, uh, like when you’re talking about, uh, this aspect in the teams, how do you exactly go about having that conversations or having that, that visibility on a day-to-day basis? Like most, most of the things that you mentioned were qualitative in nature, right, as, as you mentioned, right? So how, how do you exactly go about doing that? Like if someone wants to understand and deploy the same thought-process in a team, how should they actually do and measure it?

Denis Čahuk: Well, from a leader’s perspective, it’s very simple, you know, because I can just ask them, “Hey, is it done? Is it on anybody’s mind today?” Um, and they might tell me, “Yeah, it’s done, but not merged.” Or, “It’s waiting for review, but it’s done, but it’s kind of waiting for review.” And then that might be one possible answer. Um, it doesn’t need to be qualitative in the sense that I need a human for that. What, you know, what I’m looking for is precision. Like, is it, is it definitively done? Was there an increment? You know, did we test our assumptions? What, is there a releasable artifact? Is it possible to gain feedback on this?

Kovid Batra: Got it.

Denis Čahuk: Did you, did you talk to the team to establish if we deploy this as soon as possible, what question do we want to answer? Like what feedback, what kind of product feedback are we looking for? Or are we just blindly going through a list of features? Like, are we making improvements to our software or is somebody else who is not an engineer? Maybe that’s the problem, right? So it’s very difficult to pinpoint to like one generic thing. But a team that I worked with, the best proxy for these kinds of improvements from the leader was how ready they felt to be interrupted and get course correction. Right? Because the main thing with priorities in a team is that, you know, the main unintuitive thing is that you need to make bets and you need to reduce the cost of you being wrong, right? So the business is making bets on the market, on the product and working with this particular team with these particular individuals. The team is making bets with implementation details to a choice of technology, ratio between keeping the lights on, technical debt and new features, support and communication styles, you know, change of technology maybe. Um, so you need to just make sure that you’re playing with the market. The upside will take care of itself. You just need to make sure that you’re not making stupid mistakes that cost you a lot, either in opportunity or actual fiscal value. Um, but once you got that out of the way, you know, sky’s the limit. A lot of engineers think that we’re expensive. It’s large projects. We gotta get it right the first time. So they try to measure how often they got it right the first time, which is silly. And usually that’s where most measurements go. Are we getting it right the first time? We need to do this to get it right the first time, right? So failure is not an option. Whereas my mantra would be, no, you are going to fail. Just make sure it happens sooner rather than later and with as little intensity as possible so that we can act on it while there’s still time.

Kovid Batra: Got it. Makes sense. Makes sense. All right. Uh, Paulo, I think, uh, we are just running short on time, but I really want to ask this question to you as well, uh, just like Denis has shared something from his experience and that’s really interesting to know like how qualitatively you can measure or see things every time and solve for those. In your experience, um, you have, uh, recently joined this startup as, as a CTO, right? So maybe how does it feel like a new CTO and what things come to your mind when you would think of improving productivity in your teams and building a team which is impactful?

Paulo André: Yeah, I joined this company as a CTO six months ago. It’s been quite a journey and it’s, so it’s very fresh in my mind. And of course, every team is different and every starting point is different and so on, but ultimately, I think the pattern that i’ve always seen in my career is that some things are just not connected and the work is not visible and there’s lack of clarity about what’s value, uh, about what are the goals, what are the priorities, how do we make decisions, like all of that stuff, right? And so, every hour that I’ve been putting into this role with my team so far in these six months has been really either, either about creating clarity or about developing competence to the extent that I can. And so the development of competence is, is basically every opportunity is an opportunity to learn, both for myself and for anyone else in the team. And I can try to leverage my coaching skills, um, in making those learning conversations effective. And then the creation of clarity in my role, I happen to lead both product and engineering, so I cannot blame somebody else for lack of clarity on what the product should be or where it should go. It’s, it’s on me. And I’ve been working with some really good people in terms of what is our product strategy? What do we focus on and not focus on? Why this and not that? What are we trying to accomplish? What are those outcomes that we were talking about that we want to drive, right? So all of that is hard to answer. It’s deceptively difficult to answer. But at the end of the day, it’s what’s most important for that engineering productivity piece, because if you have an engineering team that is, you know, doing wasted work left and right, or things are not connected, and they’re just like, not clear about what they should be doing in the first place, that doesn’t sound like the ingredients for a productive team, right? And ultimately, the product side needs to answer to a large extent those, those difficult questions. So obviously, I could go into a lot of specific details about how we’re doing this and that. I don’t think we have at least today the time for that. Maybe we can do a deep dive later. But ultimately, it’s all about how do I create clarity for everyone and for myself in the first place so I can give it and then also developing the competence of the people that we do have. And that’s the increasing the capacity to win that I was talking about earlier. And if we make good progress on these two things, then we can give a lot of control and autonomy to people because they understand what we’re going for, and they have the skills to actually deliver on that, right? That’s, that’s the holy grail. And that’s motivation, right? That’s happiness. That’s a moment at work that is so elusive. But at the end of the day, I think that’s what we’re, we’re working towards.

Kovid Batra: Totally. I’ll still, uh, want to deep dive a little bit in any one of those, uh, instances, like if you have something to share from last six months where you actually, when prioritized this transparency for the team to be in, uh, how exactly you executed it, a small instance or a small maybe a meeting that you have had and..

Paulo André: Very simple example. Very simple example. Um, one of the things that I immediately noticed in the team is that a lot of the work that was happening was just not visible. It was not on a ticket. It was not on a notion document. It was nowhere, right? Because knowledge was in people’s minds, and so there was a lot of like, gaps of understanding and things that would just take a lot longer than they think they should. And so I already mentioned my bias towards lean software development. What does that mean? First and foremost, make the work visible because if you don’t make the work visible, you have no chance of optimizing the process and getting better at what you do. So I’ve been hammering this idea of making the work visible. I think my team is sick of me pointing to is there a ticket for it? Did you create a ticket for it? Where is the ticket? And so on. Because the way we work with Jira, that’s, that’s where the work becomes visible. And I think now we got to a point where this just became second nature, uh, for all of us. So that would be one example where it’s like very basic fundamental thing. Don’t need to measure anything. Don’t need complicated KPIs and whatnot. What we do need is to make the work visible so we can reason about it together. That’s it.

Kovid Batra: Makes sense. And anything which you found very unique about this team and you took a unique approach to solve it? Any, anything of that sort?

Paulo André: Unique? Oh, that’s a, that’s a really good question. I mean, everyone is different, but at the end of the day, we’re all human beings trying to work together towards something that is somehow meaningful. And so from that perspective, frankly, no real surprises. I think what I’m, if anything, I’m really grateful for the team to be so driven to do better, even if, you know, we lack the experience in many areas that we need to level up. Um, but as far as something being really unique, I think maybe a challenge our team has to really deal with tough technical challenges is around email deliverability, for example, that’s not necessarily unique. Of course, there’s other companies that need to debate themselves with the exact same problems. But in my career, that’s not a particular topic that I have to deal with a lot. And I’m seeing, like, just how complex and how tricky it is to get to get right. Um, and it’s an always evolving sort of landscape for those that are familiar with that type of stuff. So, yeah, not a good, not a good answer to your question. There’s nothing unique. It’s just that, yeah, what’s unique is the team. The team is unique. There’s no other team like this one, like these individuals doing this thing right here, right now in this company in 2024.

Kovid Batra: Great, man. I think your team is gonna love you for that. All right. I think there will be a lot more questions from the audience now. We’ll dedicate some time to that. We’ll take a minute’s break here and we’ll just gather all the questions that the audience has put in. Uh, though we are running a little out of time, is it okay for you guys to like extend for 5–10 minutes? Perfect. All right. Uh, so we’ll take a break for a minute and, uh, just gather the questions here.

All right. I think time to get started with the questions. Uh, I see a lot of them. Uh, let’s take them one by one on the screen and start answering those. Okay. So the first one is coming from, uh, Kshitij Mohan. That’s, uh, the CEO of Typo. Hi, Kshitij. Uh, everything is going good here. Uh, so this is for Denis. Uh, as someone working at the intersection of engineering and cloud technologies, how do you prioritize between technical debt and innovation?

Denis Čahuk: It’s a great question. Hey, Kshitij. Well, I think first of all, I need to know whether it’s actual debt or whether it’s just crap code. You know, like it’s crappy implementation is not an excuse for debt, right? So for you to have debt, there are three things needed to have happen. At some point in the past, you had two choices, A or B. And you made a choice without, with insufficient knowledge. And later on, you figured out that either something in the market changed or timing changed, or we gained more knowledge, and we realized that we, that now the other one is better, for whatever reason. I mean, it’s unnecessary that it was wrong at the time, but we now have more information that we need to go from A to B. Uh, originally we picked A. Now you also need to know how much it costs to go from A to B and how much you stand to gain or trade if you decide not to do that, right? So maybe going from A to B now cost you two months and ten thousand euros and doing it later next year, maybe it’s going to double the cost and add an extra week. That’s technical debt. Like the, the nature of that decision, that’s technical debt. If you, if you made the wrong decision in, in the past and you know it was the wrong decision and now you’re trying to explore whether you want to do something about it, that’s not technical debt. That’s just, you know, that’s you seeking for excuses to not do a rewrite. So it’s, first of all you need to identify is it debt. If it is debt, you know the cost, you know the trade-off, you know, you know, you can either put it on a timeline or you can measure some kind of business outcome with it. So that’s one side.

On the, on the innovation side, you need to decide what is innovation exactly? You know, is it like an investment? Is it a capital expense where I am building a laboratory and we’re going to innovate with new technologies? And then once we build them, we will find, um, sort of private market applications for them or B2B applications for them. Like, is it that kind of innovation? Or is innovation a umbrella term for new features, right? Cause, cause that’s operational. That’s much closer to operational expense, operational expense, right? So it’s just something you do continuously and you deliver continuously, and that innovation that you do can continuously feature development will also produce new debt. So once you’ve got these two things, these two sides figured out, then it’s a very simple decision. How much debt can you live with? How fast are you creating new debt compared to how fast you’re paying it off? And what can you do to get rid of all the non-debt, all the crap, essentially? That’s it, you know. Then you just make sure that you balance out those activities and that you consistently do them. It isn’t just, oh yeah. We do innovation for nine months and then we pay off debt. That usually doesn’t go very well.

Kovid Batra: I think this is coming from a very personal pain point. Now we’re really moving towards the AI wave and building things at Typo. That’s where Kshitij is coming from. Uh, totally. I think, thanks, thanks, Denis. I think we’ll move on to the next question now. Uh, that’s from, uh, Madhurima. Yeah. Hey Paulo, this one’s for you. Uh, which metric do you think is often overlooked in engineering teams but has significant impact on long-term success?

Paulo André: Yeah, that’s a great question. I’m going to, I’m going to give a bit of a cheeky answer and I’m going to say, disclaimer, this is not a metric that I track with, we track with, with my team, and it’s also not, I don’t know, a very scientific way or concrete way of measuring it. However, to the question, what is overlooked in engineering teams and has significant long-term impact, or success, on long-term success, that’s what I would call ‘mean time to clarity’. How quickly do we get clear on where we need to be and how do we get there? Right? And we don’t have all the answers upfront. We need to, as Denis mentioned earlier, experiment and iterate and learn and we’ll get smarter, hopefully, as we go along, as we learn. But how quickly we get to that clarity in every which way that we’re working. I think that’s, that’s the one that is most important because it has implications, right? Um, if we don’t look at that and if we don’t care about that, are we doing what it takes to create that clarity in the first place? And if that’s not the case, the waste is going to be abundant, right? So that’s the one I would say as an engineering leader, how do I get for myself all the clarity that I need to be able to pass it along to others and create that sense that we know where we’re going and what we don’t know, we have the means to learn and to keep getting smarter.

Kovid Batra: Cool. Great answer there. Uh, let’s move on to the next one. I think this one is again for Paulo. Yeah.

Paulo André: Okay, so you know what? Maybe this is going to be a bit, uh, I don’t know what to call it, but considering that I don’t think the most important things are gonna change in the next five years, um, AI notwithstanding, and what are the most important things? It’s still a bunch of people working together and depending on each other to achieve common goals. We may have less people with more artificial intelligence, but I don’t think we’re anywhere near the point where the artificial intelligence just does everything, including the thinking for itself. And so with that in mind, it’s still back to what I said earlier, um, in the session. It’s really about how is the work flowing from left to right? And I don’t know of a better, um, sort of set of metrics than the DORA metrics for this, particularly cycle time and deployment frequency and that sort of stuff that is more about the actual flow. Um, but like, you know, let’s not get into the DORA metrics. I’m sure the audience here already knows a lot about it, but that’s, that’s, I think, what, what is the most important, um, and will continue to be critical in the next five years, um, that’s, that’s basically it.

Kovid Batra: Cool. Moving on. All right. That’s again for, oh, this one, Denis. How do you ensure cloud solutions remain secure and scalable while addressing ever-changing customer demands?

Denis Čahuk: Well, there’s two parts to that question. You know, one is security, the other one is ever-changing customer demands. I think, you know, security will be a sort of an expression of the standard, or at least some degree of sensible defaults within the team. So the better question would be, what do engineers need to not have to consciously, to not have to constantly and consciously and deliberately think about security, right? So do they have support by, are they supported by a security expert? Do they have platform engineering teams that are supporting with security initiatives, right? So if there’s a product team that’s focusing on product, support them so that they also don’t have to become an expert in security, cause that’s where all the problems start, where you basically have a team of five and they need to wear 20 hats and they start triaging the hats and making trade-offs in security, you know. And usually, usually large teams that are overwhelmed, love doing privacy or security trade-offs because they don’t have skin in the game. The business has skin in the game, right? And then when you individuate incentive to such a degree that it becomes dysfunctional, um, security usually doesn’t bode well. Um, at least not till there’s some incident or maybe some security review or some inspection, et cetera.

So give the teams what they need. If they’re not a security expert, provide them support. Um, and the same thing with scalability. Scalability is also something that can benefit more from tighter collaboration, more so than security. Um, so just make sure that the team is able to express itself as a team through pair programming or having more immediate conversations rather than just, you know, asynchronous code review conversations or stand up conversations way at the end of the cycle. At the end of the cycle when the code is written and it’s going into merging or QA, it’s too late, the code is written, right? So you want the preempt. That solution is being created by the team being able to express itself as a team rather than just a group of individuals, being the individual goals.

Kovid Batra: Cool. I think, uh, we have a few more questions, but running way out of time now. Uh, maybe we can take one more last, last question and then we can wrap it up.

Paulo André: Sounds good. Okay, so this one is for me, right? How do I approach, uh, integrating new tools and frameworks into engineering workflows without disrupting productivity? That, that final piece is interesting. I think it also starts with how we frame this type of stuff. So there is a cost to making improvements. I don’t think we can have our cake and eat it, too, necessarily. And it’s just part of the job, and it’s part of what we do. And so, um, you know, for example, if you take the time to have a regular retrospective with your team, right, is that going to impact productivity? I mean, you could be coding for an extra hour every two weeks. It’s certainly going to have some impact. But then it also depends on what is the outcome of that retrospective, and how much does it impact the long-term, um, you know, capacity to win of the team. So with that in mind, what I would say is that the most important thing I find is that you don’t just, again, as an engineering leader, as an engineering manager, you just don’t, you don’t just download certain practices and tools and frameworks on the teams. You always start from what are we trying to solve here and why does it matter and get that shared understanding to the point where we’re all looking at the same problem roughly the same way. We can then disagree on solutions, but we agree that this is a problem worth solving right now, and we’re gonna go and do that. And so the tools and the frameworks are kind of like downstream from that. Okay, now what do we need to gain the inside? Oh, now what do we need to solve the problem? Then we can talk about those things. Okay? So as an example, one thing I’m working on now with my team, I mentioned this earlier, I believe is like, uh, a bit of a full-on product delivery, product discovery and delivery, um, process, right? That includes a product strategy, um, that shouldn’t change that much that often. And then there are a lot of tools and frameworks that we can use. Tools, we use three different types of projects in Jira, for example. And when it comes to frameworks, we’re starting to adopt something called opportunity solution trees, which is just a fancy way of saying what outcomes are we trying to generate, what opportunities do we see to, to get there and what are the solutions that can capitalize on these opportunities, right? That sort of thing. But it all starts with we need to gain clarity about where we’re gonna go as a business and as a product and everything kind of comes downstream from that, right? So I think if you take the time and this is where I’ll leave it. If you take the time and I think you should to start there and to do this groundwork and create this shared context and understanding with your teams, everything else downstream becomes so much easier because you can connect it to the problem that you’re solving. Otherwise, you’re just talking solutions for problems that most people will think they are inexistent or they just look completely different, right? And this takes work, this takes time, this takes energy, this takes attention, takes all of those things. But frankly, if you ask me, that’s the work of leadership. That’s the work of management.

Kovid Batra: Great. Well said, Paulo. I think Denis has a point to add here.

Denis Čahuk: Yeah, I had a conversation this week with one of the CEOs and founders of one of Ljubljana, Slovenia’s biggest agencies, because we were talking about this. And, and, and they asked me this question, they said, “Denis, you don’t have a catalog. Like, what do you do? Like, how do, how does working with you look like? Do we do a workshop or something?” And I said, and I asked, “Do you want to do a workshop? And, and I saw on their face, they said, “Well..” I told them, “Yes, exactly, exactly. That’s why I don’t have a catalog because, because, because the workshops are this, I will show you how a great team works, right? I will give you all of this fancy storytelling about how productive teams work, and then you’re like, “Great. Cool. But we’re not that and we can’t have that in our team.” So great, now I’d go away because I’m, because I’d feel demoralized, right? Like that’s not a good way of approaching working with that team. I, I always tell them, “Look, I don’t know what will help you. You probably also don’t know what will help you. We need to figure it out together. But generally, what’s more important than figuring out how to help you is to figure out how much are you willing to invest consistently in improvement? Because maybe I teach you something and you only have 10 minutes. That’s the wrong way about it, right? I need to ask you how much time do you have consistently every week 15 minutes? Okay, then when I need to teach you something that you can put in practice every 15 minutes Otherwise, I’m robbing you of your time. Otherwise, I’m wasting your time. If you have three hour retrospectives and we’re putting nothing into action, I’m wasting your time, right? So we need to personally figure out like what is consistent for you? What kind of improvement, how intense do you want it? How do you know if you’re making progress?”

Those two are the most important things, because I always come to these kinds of questions about new tools and frameworks because people love asking me about, “Hey, Denis. Can you do a TDD workshop?”, “Denis, can you do a domain-driven design workshop?”, “Denis, can you help us do event storming?” And I always say, “If what you need is that one workshop, it’s not going to solve any problems because I’m all about consistent improvement, about learning, about growing your team, about, you know, investing into the people, not about changing, you know, changing some label or some other label.” And I always come back to the mantra of what can you do consistently starting this week so that the product and the team is much better six months from now? That’s the big question. That’s, that should be the focus. Cause if you need to learn something, you know, go do a certification that takes you a year to perform correctly, and then you need to renew it every year. That’s nonsense. This week, what can we do this week? Start this week, apply this week, and then consistently grow and apply every single week for the next six months. That would be huge. Or you can go to a conference and send everybody on vacation and pretend the workshop was very productive. Thank you.

Kovid Batra: Perfect. I think that brings us to the end of this episode. Uh, I think the next episode that we’re going to have would be in the next year, which is not very far. So, before we depart, uh, I think I would like to wish the audience, uh, a very Happy New Year in advance, a Merry Christmas in advance. And to both of our panelists also, Paulo, Denis, thank you, thank you so much, uh, for taking out time. It was really great talking to you. I would love to have you both again here. talking more in depth about different topics and how to make teams better. But for today, that’s our time. Anything that you would like to, that you guys would want to add, please feel free. All right. Yeah, please go ahead.

Denis Čahuk: Thanks for inviting us.

Paulo André: Yeah, exactly. From my side, I was just going to say that thanks for having us. Thanks also to the audience that has put up with us and also asked very good questions, to be honest. Unfortunately, we couldn’t get to a few more that are still there that I think are very good ones. Um, but yeah, looking forward to coming back and deep diving into, into some of the topics that we talked about here.

Kovid Batra: Great. Definitely.

Denis Čahuk: And thank you for Kovid for inviting us and for introducing us to each other and to everybody backstage and at Typo for, they’re probably doing a lot of annoying groundwork at the background that makes all of this so much more enjoyable. Thank you.

Kovid Batra: All right, guys. Thank you. Thank you so much. Have a great evening ahead. Bye!

‍

Every delay in your deployment could mean losing a customer. Speed and reliability are crucial, yet many teams struggle with slow deployment cycles, frustrating rollbacks, and poor visibility into performance metrics.

When you’ve worked hard on a feature, it is frustrating when a last-minute bug derails the deployment. Or you face a rollback that disrupts workflows and undermines team confidence. These familiar scenarios breed anxiety and inefficiency, impacting team dynamics and business outcomes.

Fortunately, DORA metrics offer a practical framework to address these challenges. By leveraging these metrics, organizations can gain insights into their CI/CD practices, pinpoint areas for improvement, and cultivate a culture of accountability. This blog will explore how to optimize CI/CD processes using DORA metrics, providing best practices and actionable strategies to help teams deliver quality software faster and more reliably.

Understanding the challenges in CI/CD optimization

Before we dive into solutions, it’s important to recognize the common challenges teams face in CI/CD optimization. By understanding these issues, we can better appreciate the strategies needed to overcome them.

Slow deployment cycles

Development teams frequently experience slow deployment cycles due to a variety of factors, including complex code bases, inadequate testing, and manual processes. Each of these elements can create significant bottlenecks. A sluggish cycle not only hampers agility but also reduces responsiveness to customer needs and market changes. To address this, teams can adopt practices like:

• Streamlining the pipeline: Evaluate each step in your deployment pipeline to identify redundancies or unnecessary manual interventions. Aim to automate where possible.
• Using feature flags: Implement feature toggles to enable or disable features without deploying new code. This allows you to deploy more frequently while managing risk effectively.

Frequent rollbacks

Frequent rollbacks can significantly disrupt workflows and erode team confidence. They typically indicate issues such as inadequate testing, lack of integration processes, or insufficient quality assurance. To mitigate this:

• Enhance testing practices: Invest in automated testing at all levels—unit, integration, and end-to-end testing. This ensures that issues are caught early in the development process.
• Implement a staging environment: Conduct final tests before deployment, use a staging environment that mirrors production. This practice helps catch integration issues that might not appear in earlier testing phases.

Visibility gaps

A lack of visibility into your CI/CD pipeline can make it challenging to track performance and pinpoint areas for improvement. This opacity can lead to delays and hinder your ability to make data-driven decisions. To improve visibility:

• Adopt dashboard tools: Use dashboards that visualize key metrics in real time, allowing teams to monitor the health of the CI/CD pipeline effectively.
• Regularly review performance: Schedule consistent review meetings to discuss metrics, successes, and areas for improvement. This fosters a culture of transparency and accountability.

Cultural barriers

Cultural barriers between development and operations teams can lead to misunderstandings and inefficiencies. To foster a more collaborative environment:

• Encourage cross-team collaboration: Hold regular meetings that bring developers and operations staff together to discuss challenges and share knowledge.
• Cultivate a DevOps mindset: Promote the principles of DevOps across your organization to break down silos and encourage shared responsibility for software delivery.

We understand how these challenges can create stress and hinder your team’s well-being. Addressing them is crucial not just for project success but also for maintaining a positive and productive work environment.

Introduction to DORA metrics

DORA (DevOps Research and Assessment) metrics are key performance indicators that provide valuable insights into your software delivery performance. They help measure and improve the effectiveness of your CI/CD practices, making them crucial for software teams aiming for excellence.

Overview of the four key metrics

• Deployment frequency: This metric indicates how often code is successfully deployed to production. High deployment frequency shows a responsive and agile team.
• Lead time for changes: This measures the time it takes for code to go from committed to deployed in production. Short lead times indicate efficient processes and quick feedback loops.
• Change failure rate: This tracks the percentage of deployments that lead to failures in production. A lower change failure rate reflects higher code quality and effective testing practices.
• Mean time to recovery (MTTR): This metric assesses how quickly the team can restore service after a failure. A shorter MTTR indicates a resilient system and effective incident management practices.

By understanding and utilizing these metrics, software teams gain actionable insights that foster continuous improvement and a culture of accountability.

Best practices for CI/CD optimization using DORA metrics

Implementing best practices is crucial for optimizing your CI/CD processes. Each practice provides actionable insights that can lead to substantial improvements.

Measure and analyze current performance

To effectively measure and analyze your current performance, start by utilizing the right tools to gather valuable data. This foundational step is essential for identifying areas that need improvement.

• Utilize tools: Use tools like GitLab, Jenkins, and Typo to collect and visualize data on your DORA metrics. This data forms a solid foundation for identifying performance gaps.
• Conduct regular performance reviews: Regularly review performance to pinpoint bottlenecks and areas needing improvement. A data-driven approach can reveal insights that may not be immediately obvious.
• Establish baseline metrics: Set baseline metrics to understand your current performance, allowing you to set realistic improvement targets.

How Typo helps: Typo seamlessly integrates with your CI/CD tools, offering real-time insights into DORA metrics. This integration simplifies assessment and helps identify specific areas for enhancement.

Set specific, measurable goals

Clearly defined goals are crucial for driving performance. Establishing specific, measurable goals aligns your team's efforts with broader organizational objectives.

• Define SMART goals: Establish goals that are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART) aligned with your DORA metrics to ensure clarity in your objectives.
• Communicate goals clearly: Ensure that these goals are communicated effectively to all team members. Utilize project management tools like ClickUp to track progress and maintain accountability.
• Align with business goals: Align your objectives with broader business goals to support overall company strategy, reinforcing the importance of each team member's contribution.

How Typo helps: Typo's goal-setting and tracking capabilities promote accountability within your team, helping monitor progress toward targets and keeping everyone aligned and focused.

Implement incremental changes

Implementing gradual changes based on data insights can lead to more sustainable improvements. Focusing on small, manageable changes can often yield better results than sweeping overhauls.

• Introduce gradual improvements: Focus on small, achievable changes based on insights from your DORA metrics. This approach is often more effective than trying to overhaul the entire system at once.
• Enhance automation and testing: Work on enhancing automation and testing processes to reduce lead times and failure rates. Continuous integration practices should include automated unit and integration tests.
• Incorporate continuous testing: Implement a CI/CD pipeline that includes continuous testing. By catching issues early, teams can significantly reduce lead times and minimize the impact of failures.

How Typo helps: Typo provides actionable recommendations based on performance data, guiding teams through effective process changes that can be implemented incrementally.

Foster a culture of collaboration

A collaborative environment fosters innovation and efficiency. Encouraging open communication and shared responsibility can significantly enhance team dynamics.

• Encourage open communication: Promote transparent communication among team members using tools like Slack or Microsoft Teams.
• Utilize retrospectives: Regularly hold retrospectives to celebrate successes and learn collectively from setbacks. This practice can improve team dynamics and help identify areas for improvement.
• Promote cross-functional collaboration: Foster collaboration between development and operations teams. Conduct joint planning sessions to ensure alignment on objectives and priorities.

How Typo helps: With features like shared dashboards and performance reports, Typo facilitates transparency and alignment, breaking down silos and ensuring everyone is on the same page.

Review and adapt regularly

Regular reviews are essential for maintaining momentum and ensuring alignment with goals. Establishing a routine for evaluation can help your team adapt to changes effectively.

• Establish a routine: Create a routine for evaluating your DORA metrics and adjusting strategies accordingly. Regular check-ins help ensure that your team remains aligned with its goals.
• Conduct retrospectives: Use retrospectives to gather insights and continuously improve processes. Cultivate a safe environment where team members can express concerns and suggest improvements.
• Consider A/B testing: Implement A/B testing in your CI/CD process to measure effectiveness. Testing different approaches can help identify the most effective practices.

How Typo helps: Typo’s advanced analytics capabilities support in-depth reviews, making it easier to identify trends and adapt your strategies effectively. This ongoing evaluation is key to maintaining momentum and achieving long-term success.

Additional strategies for faster deployments

To enhance your CI/CD process and achieve faster deployments, consider implementing the following strategies:

Automation

Automate various aspects of the development lifecycle to improve efficiency. For build automation, utilize tools like Jenkins, GitLab CI/CD, or CircleCI to streamline the process of building applications from source code. This reduces errors and increases speed. Implementing automated unit, integration, and regression tests allows teams to catch defects early in the development process, significantly reducing the time spent on manual testing and enhancing code quality. 

Additionally, automate the deployment of applications to different environments (development, staging, production) using tools like Ansible, Puppet, or Chef to ensure consistency and minimize the risk of human error during deployments.

Version Control

Employ a version control system like Git to effectively track changes to your codebase and facilitate collaboration among developers. Implementing effective branching strategies such as Gitflow or GitHub Flow helps manage different versions of your code and isolate development work, allowing multiple team members to work on features simultaneously without conflicts.

Continuous Integration

Encourage developers to commit their code changes frequently to the main branch. This practice helps reduce integration issues and allows conflicts to be identified early. Set up automated builds and tests that run whenever new code is committed to the main branch. 

This ensures that issues are caught immediately, allowing for quicker resolutions. Providing developers with immediate feedback on the success or failure of their builds and tests fosters a culture of accountability and promotes continuous improvement.

Continuous Delivery

Automate the deployment of applications to various environments, which reduces manual effort and minimizes the potential for errors. Ensure consistency between different environments to minimize deployment risks; utilizing containers or virtualization can help achieve this. 

Additionally, consider implementing canary releases, where new features are gradually rolled out to a small subset of users before a full deployment. This allows teams to monitor performance and address any issues before they impact the entire user base.

Infrastructure as Code (IaC)

Use tools like Terraform or CloudFormation to manage infrastructure resources (e.g., servers, networks, storage) as code. This approach simplifies infrastructure management and enhances consistency across environments. Store infrastructure code in a version control system to track changes and facilitate collaboration. 

This practice enables teams to maintain a history of infrastructure changes and revert if necessary. Ensuring consistent infrastructure across different environments through IaC reduces discrepancies that can lead to deployment failures.

Monitoring and Feedback

Implement monitoring tools to track the performance and health of your applications in production. Continuous monitoring allows teams to proactively identify and resolve issues before they escalate. Set up automated alerts to notify teams of critical issues or performance degradation. 

Quick alerts enable faster responses to potential problems. Use feedback from monitoring and alerting systems to identify and address problems proactively, helping teams learn from past deployments and improve future processes.

Final thoughts

By implementing these best practices, you will improve your deployment speed and reliability while also boosting team satisfaction and delivering better experiences to your customers. Remember, you’re not alone on this journey—resources and communities are available to support you every step of the way.

Your best bet for seamless collaboration is with Typo, sign up for a personalized demo and find out yourself! 

‍

Mobile development comes with a unique set of challenges: rapid release cycles, stringent user expectations, and the complexities of maintaining quality across diverse devices and operating systems. Engineering teams need robust frameworks to measure their performance and optimize their development processes effectively. 

DORA metrics—Deployment Frequency, Lead Time for Changes, Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR), and Change Failure Rate—are key indicators that provide valuable insights into a team’s DevOps performance. Leveraging these metrics can empower mobile development teams to make data-driven improvements that boost efficiency and enhance user satisfaction.

Importance of DORA Metrics in Mobile Development

DORA metrics, rooted in research from the DevOps Research and Assessment (DORA) group, help teams measure key aspects of software delivery performance.

Here's why they matter for mobile development:

• Deployment Frequency: Mobile teams need to keep up with the fast pace of updates required to satisfy user demand. Frequent, smooth deployments signal a team’s ability to deliver features, fixes, and updates consistently.

• Lead Time for Changes: This metric tracks the time between code commit and deployment. For mobile teams, shorter lead times mean a streamlined process, allowing quicker responses to user feedback and faster feature rollouts.

• MTTR: Downtime in mobile apps can result in frustrated users and poor reviews. By tracking MTTR, teams can assess and improve their incident response processes, minimizing the time an app remains in a broken state.

• Change Failure Rate: A high change failure rate can indicate inadequate testing or rushed releases. Monitoring this helps mobile teams enhance their quality assurance practices and prevent issues from reaching production.

Deep Dive into Practical Solutions for Tracking DORA Metrics

Tracking DORA metrics in mobile app development involves a range of technical strategies. Here, we explore practical approaches to implement effective measurement and visualization of these metrics.

Implementing a Measurement Framework

Integrating DORA metrics into existing workflows requires more than a simple add-on; it demands technical adjustments and robust toolchains that support continuous data collection and analysis.

1. Automated Data Collection

Automating the collection of DORA metrics starts with choosing the right CI/CD platforms and tools that align with mobile development. Popular options include:

• Jenkins Pipelines: Set up custom pipeline scripts that log deployment events and timestamps, capturing deployment frequency and lead times. Use plugins like the Pipeline Stage View for visual insights.

• GitLab CI/CD: With GitLab's built-in analytics, teams can monitor deployment frequency and lead time for changes directly within their CI/CD pipeline.

• GitHub Actions: Utilize workflows that trigger on commits and deployments. Custom actions can be developed to log data and push it to external observability platforms for visualization.

Technical setup: For accurate deployment tracking, implement triggers in your CI/CD pipelines that capture key timestamps at each stage (e.g., start and end of builds, start of deployment). This can be done using shell scripts that append timestamps to a database or monitoring tool.

2. Real-Time Monitoring and Visualization

To make sense of the collected data, teams need a robust visualization strategy. Here’s a deeper look at setting up effective dashboards:

• Prometheus with Grafana: Integrate Prometheus to scrape data from CI/CD pipelines, and use Grafana to create dashboards with deployment trends and lead time breakdowns.

• Elastic Stack (ELK): Ship logs from your CI/CD process to Elasticsearch and build visualizations in Kibana. This setup provides detailed logs alongside high-level metrics.

Technical Implementation Tips:

• Use Prometheus exporters or custom scripts that expose metric data as HTTP endpoints.

• Design Grafana dashboards to show current and historical trends for DORA metrics, using panels that highlight anomalies or spikes in lead time or failure rates.
  
  

3. Comprehensive Testing Pipelines

Testing is integral to maintaining a low change failure rate. To align with this, engineering teams should develop thorough, automated testing strategies:

• Unit Testing: Implement unit tests with frameworks like JUnit for Android or XCTest for iOS. Ensure these are part of every build to catch low-level issues early.

• Integration Testing: Use tools such as Espresso and UIAutomator for Android and XCUITest for iOS to validate complex user interactions and integrations.

• End-to-End Testing: Integrate Appium or Selenium to automate tests across different devices and OS versions. End-to-end testing helps simulate real-world usage and ensures new deployments don't break critical app flows.

Pipeline Integration:

• Set up your CI/CD pipeline to trigger these tests automatically post-build. Configure your pipeline to fail early if a test doesn’t pass, preventing faulty code from being deployed.

4. Incident Response and MTTR Management

Reducing MTTR requires visibility into incidents and the ability to act swiftly. Engineering teams should:

• Implement Monitoring Tools: Use tools like Firebase Crashlytics for crash reporting and monitoring. Integrate with third-party tools like Sentry for comprehensive error tracking.

• Set Up Automated Alerts: Configure alerts for critical failures using observability tools like Grafana Loki, Prometheus Alertmanager, or PagerDuty. This ensures that the team is notified as soon as an issue arises.

Strategies for Quick Recovery:

• Implement automatic rollback procedures using feature flags and deployment strategies such as blue-green deployments or canary releases.

• Use scripts or custom CI/CD logic to switch between versions if a critical incident is detected.

Weaving Typo into Your Workflow

After implementing these technical solutions, teams can leverage Typo for seamless DORA metrics integration. Typo can help consolidate data and make metric tracking more efficient and less time-consuming.

For teams looking to streamline the integration of DORA metrics tracking, Typo offers a solution that is both powerful and easy to adopt. Typo provides:

• Automated Deployment Tracking: By integrating with existing CI/CD tools, Typo collects deployment data and visualizes trends, simplifying the tracking of deployment frequency.

• Detailed Lead Time Analysis: Typo’s analytics engine breaks down lead times by stages in your pipeline, helping teams pinpoint delays in specific steps, such as code review or testing.

• Real-Time Incident Response Support: Typo includes incident monitoring capabilities that assist in tracking MTTR and offering insights into incident trends, facilitating better response strategies.

• Seamless Integration: Typo connects effortlessly with platforms like Jenkins, GitLab, GitHub, and Jira, centralizing DORA metrics in one place without disrupting existing workflows.

Typo’s integration capabilities mean engineering teams don’t need to build custom scripts or additional data pipelines. With Typo, developers can focus on analyzing data rather than collecting it, ultimately accelerating their journey toward continuous improvement.

Establishing a Continuous Improvement Cycle

To fully leverage DORA metrics, teams must establish a feedback loop that drives continuous improvement. This section outlines how to create a process that ensures long-term optimization and alignment with development goals.

1. Regular Data Reviews: Conduct data-driven retrospectives to analyze trends and set goals for improvements.
2. Iterative Process Enhancements: Use findings to adjust coding practices, enhance automated testing coverage, or refine build processes.
3. Team Collaboration and Learning: Share knowledge across teams to spread best practices and avoid repeating mistakes.

Empowering Your Mobile Development Process

DORA metrics provide mobile engineering teams with the tools needed to measure and optimize their development processes, enhancing their ability to release high-quality apps efficiently. By integrating DORA metrics tracking through automated data collection, real-time monitoring, comprehensive testing pipelines, and advanced incident response practices, teams can achieve continuous improvement. 

Tools like Typo make these practices even more effective by offering seamless integration and real-time insights, allowing developers to focus on innovation and delivering exceptional user experiences.

For agile teams, tracking productivity can quickly become overwhelming, especially when too many metrics clutter the process. Many teams feel they’re working hard without seeing the progress they expect. By focusing on a handful of high-impact JIRA metrics, teams can gain clear, actionable insights that streamline decision-making and help them stay on course. 

These five essential metrics highlight what truly drives productivity, enabling teams to make informed adjustments that propel their work forward.

Why JIRA Metrics Matter for Agile Teams

Agile teams often face missed deadlines, unclear priorities, and resource management issues. Without effective metrics, these issues remain hidden, leading to frustration. JIRA metrics provide clarity on team performance, enabling early identification of bottlenecks and allowing teams to stay agile and efficient. By tracking just a few high-impact metrics, teams can make informed, data-driven decisions that improve workflows and outcomes.

Top 5 JIRA Metrics to Improve Your Team’s Productivity

1. Work In Progress (WIP)

Work In Progress (WIP) measures the number of tasks actively being worked on. Setting WIP limits encourages teams to complete existing tasks before starting new ones, which reduces task-switching, increases focus, and improves overall workflow efficiency.

‍

‍

Technical applications: 

Setting WIP limits: On JIRA Kanban boards, teams can set WIP limits for each stage, like “In Progress” or “Review.” This prevents overloading and helps teams maintain steady productivity without overwhelming team members.

Identifying bottlenecks: WIP metrics highlight bottlenecks in real time. If tasks accumulate in a specific stage (e.g., “In Review”), it signals a need to address delays, such as availability of reviewers or unclear review standards.

Using cumulative flow diagrams: JIRA’s cumulative flow diagrams visualize WIP across stages, showing where tasks are getting stuck and helping teams keep workflows balanced.

2. Work Breakdown

Work Breakdown details how tasks are distributed across project components, priorities, and team members. Breaking down tasks into manageable parts (Epics, Stories, Subtasks) provides clarity on resource allocation and ensures each project aspect receives adequate attention.

‍

Technical applications:

Epics and stories in JIRA: JIRA enables teams to organize large projects by breaking them into Epics, Stories, and Subtasks, making complex tasks more manageable and easier to track.

Advanced roadmaps: JIRA’s Advanced Roadmaps allow visualization of task breakdown in a timeline, displaying dependencies and resource allocations. This overview helps maintain balanced workloads across project components.

Tracking priority and status: Custom filters in JIRA allow teams to view high-priority tasks across Epics and Stories, ensuring critical items are progressing as expected.

3. Developer Workload

Developer Workload monitors the task volume and complexity assigned to each developer. This metric ensures balanced workload distribution, preventing burnout and optimizing each developer’s capacity.

Technical applications:

JIRA workload reports: Workload reports aggregate task counts, hours estimated, and priority levels for each developer. This helps project managers reallocate tasks if certain team members are overloaded.

Time tracking and estimation: JIRA allows developers to log actual time spent on tasks, making it possible to compare against estimates for improved workload planning.

Capacity-based assignment: Project managers can analyze workload data to assign tasks based on each developer’s availability and capacity, ensuring sustainable productivity.

4. Team Velocity

Team Velocity measures the amount of work completed in each sprint, establishing a baseline for sprint planning and setting realistic goals.

‍

‍

Technical applications:

Velocity chart: JIRA’s Velocity Chart displays work completed versus planned work, helping teams gauge their performance trends and establish realistic goals for future sprints.

Estimating story points: Story points assigned to tasks allow teams to calculate velocity and capacity more accurately, improving sprint planning and goal setting.

Historical analysis for planning: Historical velocity data enables teams to look back at performance trends, helping identify factors that impacted past sprints and optimizing future planning.

5. Cycle Time

Cycle Time tracks how long tasks take from start to completion, highlighting process inefficiencies. Shorter cycle times generally mean faster delivery.

‍

‍

Technical applications:

Control chart: The Control Chart in JIRA visualizes Cycle Time, displaying how long tasks spend in each stage, helping to identify where delays occur.

Custom workflows and time tracking: Customizable workflows allow teams to assign specific time limits to each stage, identifying areas for improvement and reducing Cycle Time.

SLAs for timely completion: For teams with service-level agreements, setting cycle-time goals can help track SLA adherence, providing benchmarks for performance.

How to Set Up JIRA Metrics for Success: Practical Tips for Maximizing the Benefits of JIRA Metrics with Typo

Effectively setting up and using JIRA metrics requires strategic configuration and the right tools to turn raw data into actionable insights. Here’s a practical, step-by-step guide to configuring these metrics in JIRA for optimal tracking and collaboration. With Typo’s integration, teams gain additional capabilities for managing, analyzing, and discussing metrics collaboratively.

Step 1: Configure Key Dashboards for Visibility

Setting up dashboards in JIRA for metrics like Cycle Time, Developer Workload, and Team Velocity allows for quick access to critical data.

How to set up:

1. Go to the Dashboards section in JIRA, select Create Dashboard, and add specific gadgets such as Cumulative Flow Diagram for WIP and Velocity Chart for Team Velocity.
2. Position each gadget for easy reference, giving your team a visual summary of project progress at a glance.

Step 2: Use Typo’s Sprint Analysis for Enhanced Sprint Visibility

Typo’s sprint analysis offers an in-depth view of your team’s progress throughout a sprint, enabling engineering managers and developers to better understand performance trends, spot blockers, and refine future planning. Typo integrates seamlessly with JIRA to provide real-time sprint insights, including data on team velocity, task distribution, and completion rates.

Key features of Typo’s sprint analysis:

Detailed sprint performance summaries: Typo automatically generates sprint performance summaries, giving teams a clear view of completed tasks, WIP, and uncompleted items.

Sprint progress tracking: Typo visualizes your team’s progress across each sprint phase, enabling managers to identify trends and respond to bottlenecks faster.

Velocity trend analysis: Track velocity over multiple sprints to understand performance patterns. Typo’s charts display average, maximum, and minimum velocities, helping teams make data-backed decisions for future sprint planning.

Step 3: Leverage Typo’s Customizable Reports for Deeper Analysis

Typo enables engineering teams to go beyond JIRA’s native reporting by offering customizable reports. These reports allow teams to focus on specific metrics that matter most to them, creating targeted views that support sprint retrospectives and help track ongoing improvements.

Key benefits of Typo reports:

Customized metrics views: Typo’s reporting feature allows you to tailor reports by sprint, team member, or task type, enabling you to create a focused analysis that meets team objectives.

Sprint performance comparison: Easily compare current sprint performance with past sprints to understand progress trends and potential areas for optimization.

Collaborative insights: Typo’s centralized platform allows team members to add comments and insights directly into reports, facilitating discussion and shared understanding of sprint outcomes.

Step 4: Track Team Velocity with Typo’s Velocity Trend Analysis

Typo’s Velocity Trend Analysis provides a comprehensive view of team capacity and productivity over multiple sprints, allowing managers to set realistic goals and adjust plans according to past performance data.

How to use:

1. Access Typo’s Velocity Trend Analysis to view velocity averages and deviations over time, helping your team anticipate work capacity more accurately.
2. Use Typo’s charts to visualize and discuss the effects of any changes made to workflows or team processes, allowing for data-backed sprint planning.
3. Incorporate these insights into future sprint planning meetings to establish achievable targets and manage team workload effectively.

Step 5: Automate Alerts and Notifications for Key Metrics

Setting up automated alerts in JIRA and Typo helps teams stay on top of metrics without manual checking, ensuring that critical changes are visible in real-time.

How to set up:

1. Use JIRA’s automation rules to create alerts for specific metrics. For example, set a notification if a task’s Cycle Time exceeds a predefined threshold, signaling potential delays.
2. Enable notifications in Typo for sprint analysis updates, such as velocity changes or WIP limits being exceeded, to keep team members informed throughout the sprint.
3. Automate report generation in Typo, allowing your team to receive regular updates on sprint performance without needing to pull data manually.

Step 6: Host Collaborative Retrospectives with Typo

Typo’s integration makes retrospectives more effective by offering a shared space for reviewing metrics and discussing improvement opportunities as a team.

How to use:

1. Use Typo’s reports and sprint analysis as discussion points in retrospective meetings, focusing on completed vs. planned work, Cycle Time efficiency, and WIP trends.
2. Encourage team members to add insights or suggestions directly into Typo, fostering collaborative improvement and shared accountability.
3. Document key takeaways and actionable steps in Typo, ensuring continuous tracking and follow-through on improvement efforts in future sprints.

Read more: Moving beyond JIRA Sprint Reports 

Monitoring Scope Creep

Scope creep—when a project’s scope expands beyond its original objectives—can disrupt timelines, strain resources, and lead to project overruns. Monitoring scope creep is essential for agile teams that need to stay on track without sacrificing quality. 

In JIRA, tracking scope creep involves setting clear boundaries for task assignments, monitoring changes, and evaluating their impact on team workload and sprint goals.

How to Monitor Scope Creep in JIRA

1. Define scope boundaries: Start by clearly defining the scope of each project, sprint, or epic in JIRA, detailing the specific tasks and goals that align with project objectives. Make sure these definitions are accessible to all team members.
2. Use the issue history and custom fields: Track changes in task descriptions, deadlines, and priorities by utilizing JIRA’s issue history and custom fields. By setting up custom fields for scope-related tags or labels, teams can flag tasks or sub-tasks that deviate from the original project scope, making scope creep more visible.
3. Monitor workload adjustments with Typo: When scope changes are approved, Typo’s integration with JIRA can help assess their impact on the team’s workload. Use Typo’s reporting to analyze new tasks added mid-sprint or shifts in priorities, ensuring the team remains balanced and prepared for adjusted goals.
4. Sprint retrospectives for reflection: During sprint retrospectives, review any instances of scope creep and assess the reasons behind the adjustments. This allows the team to identify recurring patterns, evaluate the necessity of certain changes, and refine future project scoping processes.

By closely monitoring and managing scope creep, agile teams can keep their projects within boundaries, maintain productivity, and make adjustments only when they align with strategic objectives.

Building a Data-Driven Engineering Culture

Building a data-driven culture goes beyond tracking metrics; it’s about engaging the entire team in understanding and applying these insights to support shared goals. By fostering collaboration and using metrics as a foundation for continuous improvement, teams can align more effectively and adapt to challenges with agility.

Regularly revisiting and refining metrics ensures they stay relevant and actionable as team priorities evolve. To see how Typo can help you create a streamlined, data-driven approach, schedule a personalized demo today and unlock your team’s full potential.

‍

Think of reading a book with multiple plot twists and branching storylines. While engaging, it can also be confusing and overwhelming when there are too many paths to follow. Just as a complex storyline can confuse readers, high Cyclic Complexity can make code hard to understand, maintain, and test, leading to bugs and errors. 

In this blog, we will discuss why high cyclomatic complexity can be problematic and ways to reduce it.

What is Cyclomatic Complexity? 

Cyclomatic Complexity, a software metric, was developed by Thomas J. Mccabe in 1976. It is a metric that indicates the complexity of the program by counting its decision points. 

A higher cyclomatic Complexity score reflects more execution paths, leading to increased complexity. On the other hand, a low score signifies fewer paths and, hence, less complexity. 

Cyclomatic Complexity is calculated using a control flow graph: 

M = E - N + 2P

M = Cyclomatic Complexity

N = Nodes (Block of code) 

E = Edges (Flow of control)

P = Number of Connected Components 

Why is High Cyclomatic Complexity Problematic? 

Increases Error Prone 

The more complex the code is, the more the chances of bugs. When there are many possible paths and conditions, developers may overlook certain conditions or edge cases during testing. This leads to defects in the software and becomes challenging to test all of them. 

Leads to Cognitive Complexity 

Cognitive complexity refers to the level of difficulty in understanding a piece of code. 

Cyclomatic Complexity is one of the factors that increases cognitive complexity. Since, it becomes overwhelming to process information effectively for developers, which makes it harder to understand the overall logic of code.

Difficulty in Onboarding 

Codebases with high cyclomatic Complexity make onboarding difficult for new developers or team members. The learning curve becomes steeper for them and they require more time and effort to understand and become productive. This also leads to misunderstanding and they may misinterpret the logic or overlook critical paths. 

Higher Risks of Defects

More complex code leads to more misunderstandings, which further results in higher defects in the codebase. Complex code is more prone to errors as it hinders adherence to coding standards and best practices. 

Rise in Maintainance Efforts 

Due to the complex codebase, the software development team may struggle to grasp the full impact of their changes which results in new errors. This further slows down the process. It also results in ripple effects i.e. difficulty in isolating changes as one modification can impact multiple areas of application. 

How to Reduce Cyclomatic Complexity? 

Function Decomposition

• Single Responsibility Principle (SRP): This principle states that each module or function should have a defined responsibility and one reason to change. If a function is responsible for multiple tasks, it can result in bloated and hard-to-maintain code. 

• Modularity: This means dividing large, complex functions into smaller, modular units so that each piece serves a focused purpose. It makes individual functions easier to understand, test, and modify without affecting other parts of the code.

• Cohesion: Cohesion focuses on keeping related code close to functions and modules. When related functions are grouped together, it results in high cohesion which helps with readability and maintainability.

• Coupling: This principle states to avoid excessive dependencies between modules. This will reduce the complexity and make each module more self-contained, enabling changes without affecting other parts of the system.

Conditional Logic Simplification

• Guard Clauses: Developers must implement guard clauses to exit from a function as soon as a condition is met. This avoids deep nesting and enhances the readability and simplicity of the main logic of the function. 

• Boolean Expressions: Use De Morgan's laws and simplify Boolean expressions to reduce the complexity of conditions. For example, rewriting! (A && B) as ! A || !B can sometimes make the code easier to understand.

• Conditional Expressions: Consider using ternary operators or switch statements where appropriate. This will condense complex conditional branches into more concise expressions which further enhance their readability and reduce code size.

• Flag Variables: Avoid unnecessary flag variables that track control flow. Developers should restructure the logic to eliminate these flags which can lead to simpler and cleaner code.

Loop Optimization

• Loop Unrolling: Expand the loop body to perform multiple operations in each iteration. This is useful for loops with a small number of iterations as it reduces loop overhead and improves performance.

• Loop Fusion: When two loops iterate over the same data, you may be able to combine them into a single loop. This enhances performance by reducing the number of loop iterations and boosting data locality.

• Loop Strength Reduction: Consider replacing costly operations in loops with less expensive ones, such as using addition instead of multiplication where possible. This will reduce the computational cost within the loop.

• Loop Invariant Code Motion: Prevent redundant computation by moving calculations that do not change with each loop iteration outside of the loop. 

Code Refactoring

• Extract Method: Move repetitive or complex code segments into separate functions. This simplifies the original function, reduces complexity, and makes code easier to reuse.

• Introduce Explanatory Variables: Use intermediate variables to hold the results of complex expressions. This can make code more readable and allow others to understand its purpose without deciphering complex operations.

• Replace Magic Numbers with Named Constants: Magic numbers are hard-coded numbers in code. Instead of directly using them, create symbolic constants for hard-coded values. It makes it easy to change the value at a later stage and improves the readability and maintainability of the code.

• Simplify Complex Expressions: Break down long, complex expressions into smaller, more digestible parts to improve readability and reduce cognitive load on the reader.

5. Design Patterns

• Strategy Pattern: This pattern allows developers to encapsulate algorithms within separate classes. By delegating responsibilities to these classes, you can avoid complex conditional statements and reduce overall code complexity.

• State Pattern: When an object has multiple states, the State Pattern can represent each state as a separate class. This simplifies conditional code related to state transitions.

• Observer Pattern: The Observer Pattern helps decouple components by allowing objects to communicate without direct dependencies. This reduces complexity by minimizing the interconnectedness of code components.

6. Code Analysis Tools

• Static Code Analyzers: Static Code Analysis Tools like Typo or Sonarqube, can automatically highlight areas of high complexity, unused code, or potential errors. This allows developers to identify and address complex code areas proactively.

• Code Coverage Tools: Code coverage is a measure that indicates the percentage of a codebase that is tested by automated tests. Tools like Typo measures code coverage, highlighting untested areas. It helps ensure that the tests cover a significant portion of the code which helps identifies untested parts and potential bugs.

‍

Other Ways to Reduce Cyclomatic Complexity 

• Identify and remove dead code to simplify the codebase and reduce maintenance efforts. This keeps the code clean, improves performance, and reduces potential confusion.

• Consolidate duplicate code into reusable functions to reduce redundancy and improve consistency. This makes it easier to update logic in one place and avoid potential bugs from inconsistent changes.

• Continuously improve code structure by refactoring regularly to enhance readability, and maintainability, and reduce technical debt. This ensures that the codebase evolves to stay efficient and adaptable to future needs.

• Perform peer reviews to catch issues early, promote coding best practices, and maintain high code quality. Code reviews encourage knowledge sharing and help align the team on coding standards.

• Write Comprehensive Unit Tests to ensure code functions correctly and supports easier refactoring in the future. They provide a safety net which makes it easier to identify issues when changes are made.

Typo - An Automated Code Review Tool

Typo’s automated code review tool identifies issues in your code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master. This means less time reviewing and more time for important tasks. It keeps your code error-free, making the whole process faster and smoother.

Key Features:

• Supports top 8 languages including C++ and C#.

• Understands the context of the code and fixes issues accurately.

• Optimizes code efficiently.

• Provides automated debugging with detailed explanations.

• Standardizes code and reduces the risk of a security breach

Conclusion 

The cyclomatic complexity metric is critical in software engineering. Reducing cyclomatic complexity increases the code maintainability, readability, and simplicity. By implementing the above-mentioned strategies, software engineering teams can reduce complexity and create a more streamlined codebase. Tools like Typo’s automated code review also help in identifying complexity issues early and providing quick fixes. Hence, enhancing overall code quality.

‍

Burndown charts are essential instruments for tracking the progress of agile teams. They are simple and effective ways to determine whether the team is on track or falling behind. However, there may be times when a burndown chart is not ideal for teams, as it may not capture a holistic view of the agile team’s progress. 

In this blog, we have discussed the latter part in greater detail. 

What is a Burndown Chart? 

Burndown Chart is a visual representation of the team’s progress used for agile project management. They are useful for scrum teams and agile project managers to assess whether the project is on track or not. 

The primary objective is to accurately depict the time allocations and plan for future resources. 

‍

‍

Components of Burndown Chart

Axes

There are two axes: x and y. The horizontal axis represents the time or iteration and the vertical axis displays user story points. 

Ideal Work Remaining 

It represents the remaining work that an agile team has at a specific point of the project or sprint under an ideal condition. 

Actual Work Remaining 

It is a realistic indication of a team's progress that is updated in real time. When this line is consistently below the ideal line, it indicates the team is ahead of schedule. When the line is above, it means they are falling behind. 

Project/Sprint End

It indicates whether the team has completed a project/sprint on time, behind or ahead of schedule. 

Data Points

The data points on the actual work remaining line represents the amount of work left at specific intervals i.e. daily updates. 

Types of Burndown Chart 

There are two types of Burndown Chart: 

Product Burndown Chart 

This type of burndown chart focuses on the big picture and visualises the entire project. It helps project managers and teams monitor the completion of work across multiple sprints and iteration. 

Sprint Burndown Chart 

Sprint Burndown chart particularly tracks the remaining work within a sprint. It indicates progress towards completing the sprint backlog. 

Advantages of Burndown Chart 

Visualises Progress 

Burndown Chart captures how much work is completed and how much is left. It allows the agile team to compare the actual progress with the ideal progress line to track if they are ahead or behind the schedule. 

Encourages Teams 

Burndown Chart motivates teams to align their progress with the ideal line. These small milestones boost morale and keep their motivation high throughout the sprint. It also reinforces the sense of achievement when they see their tasks completed on time. 

Informs Retrospectives 

It helps in analyzing performance over sprint during retrospection. Agile teams can review past data through burndown Charts to identify patterns, adjust future estimates, and refine processes for improved efficiency. It allows them to pinpoint periods where progress went down and help to uncover blockers that need to be addressed. 

Shows a Direct Comparison 

Burndown Chart visualizes the direct comparison of planned work and actual progress. It can quickly assess whether a team is on track to meet the goals, and monitor trends or recurring issues such as over-committing or underestimating tasks. 

Burndown Chart can be Misleading too. Here’s Why? 

While the Burndown Chart comes with lots of pros, it could be misleading as well. It focuses solely on the task alone without accounting for individual developer productivity. It ignores the aspects of agile software development such as code quality, team collaboration, and problem-solving. 

Burndown Chart doesn’t explain how the task impacted the developer productivity or the fluctuations due to various factors such as team morale, external dependencies, or unexpected challenges. It also doesn’t focus on work quality which results in unaddressed underlying issues.

Other Limitations of Burndown Chart 

Oversimplification of Complex Projects 

While the Burndown Chart is a visual representation of Agile teams’ progress, it fails to capture the intricate layers and interdependencies within the project. It overlooks the critical factors that influence project outcomes which may lead to misinformed decisions and unrealistic expectations. 

Ignores Scope Changes 

Scope Creep refers to modification in the project requirement such as adding new features or altering existing tasks. Burndown Chart doesn’t take note of the same rather shows a flat line or even a decline in progress which can signify that the team is underperforming, however, that’s not the actual case. This leads to misinterpretation of the team’s progress and overall project health. 

Gives Equal Weight to all the Tasks

Burndown Chart doesn’t differentiate between easy and difficult tasks. It considers all of the tasks equal, regardless of their size, complexity, or effort required. Whether the task is on priority or less impactful, it treats every task as the same. Hence, obscuring insights into what truly matters for the project's success. 

Neglects Team Dynamics 

Burndown Chart treats team members equally. It doesn't take individual contributions into consideration as well as other factors including personal challenges. It also neglects how well they are working with each other, sharing knowledge, or supporting each other in completing tasks. 

What are the Alternatives to Burndown Chart? 

Gantt Charts

Gantt Charts are ideal for complex projects. They are a visual representation of a project schedule using horizontal axes. They provide a clear timeline for each task i.e. when the project starts and ends as well as understanding overlapping tasks and dependencies between them. 

Cumulative Flow Diagram 

CFD visualizes how work moves through different stages. It offers insight into workflow status and identity trends and bottlenecks. It also helps in measuring key metrics such as cycle time and throughput. 

Kanban Boards 

Kanban Boards is an agile management tool that is best for ongoing work. It helps to visualize work, limit work in progress, and manage workflows. They can easily accommodate changes in project scope without the need for adjusting timelines. 

Burnup Chart 

Burnup Chart is a quick, easy way to plot work schedules on two lines along a vertical axis. It shows how much work has been done and the total scope of the project, hence, providing a clearer picture of project completion. 

Developer Intelligence Platforms 

DI platforms focus on how smooth and satisfying a developer experience is. It streamlines the development process and offers a holistic view of team productivity, code quality, and developer satisfaction. These platforms also provide real-time insights into various metrics that reflect the team’s overall health and efficiency beyond task completion alone.

Typo - An Effective Sprint Analysis Tool

‍

One such platform is Typo, which goes beyond the traditional metrics. Its sprint analysis is an essential tool for any team using an agile development methodology. It allows agile teams to monitor and assess progress across the sprint timeline, providing visual insights into completed work, ongoing tasks, and remaining time. This visual representation allows to spot potential issues early and make timely adjustments.

Our sprint analysis feature leverages data from Git and issue management tools to focus on team workflows. They can track task durations, identify frequent blockers, and pinpoint bottlenecks.

‍

‍

With easy integration into existing Git and Jira/Linear/Clickup workflows, Typo offers:

• Velocity Chart that shows completed work in past sprints

• Sprint Backlog that displays all tasks slated for completion within the sprint

• Tracks the status of each sprint issue.

• Measures task durations

• Highlights areas where work is delayed and identifies task blocks and causes. 

• Historical Data Analysis that compares sprint performance over time.

‍

Hence, helping agile teams stay on track, optimize processes, and deliver quality results efficiently.

‍

Conclusion 

While the burndown chart is a valuable tool for visualizing task completion and tracking progress, it often overlooks critical aspects like team morale, collaboration, code quality, and factors impacting developer productivity. There are several alternatives to the burndown chart, with Typo’s sprint analysis tool standing out as a powerful option. Through this, agile teams gain a more comprehensive view of progress, fostering resilience, motivation, and peak performance.

‍

One of the biggest hurdles in a DevOps transformation is not the technical implementation of tools but aligning the human side—culture, collaboration, and incentives. As a leader, it’s essential to recognize that different, sometimes conflicting, objectives drive both Software Engineering and Operations teams.

Engineering often views success as delivering features quickly, whereas Operations focuses on minimizing downtime and maintaining stability. These differing incentives naturally create friction, resulting in delayed deployment cycles, subpar product quality, and even a toxic work environment.

The key to solving this? Cross-functional team alignment.

Before implementing DORA metrics, you need to ensure both teams share a unified vision: delivering high-quality software at speed, with a shared understanding of responsibility. This requires fostering an environment of continuous communication and trust, where both teams collaborate to achieve overarching business goals, not just individual metrics.

Why DORA Metrics Outshine Traditional Metrics

Traditional performance metrics, often focused on specific teams (like uptime for Operations or feature count for Engineering), incentivize siloed thinking and can lead to metric manipulation. Operations might delay deployments to maintain uptime, while Engineering rushes features without considering quality.

DORA metrics, however, provide a balanced framework that encourages cooperative success. For example, by focusing on Change Failure Rate and Deployment Frequency, you create a feedback loop where neither team can game the system. High deployment frequency is only valuable if it’s accompanied by low failure rates, ensuring that the product's quality improves alongside speed.

In contrast to traditional metrics, DORA's approach emphasizes continuous improvement across the entire delivery pipeline, leading to better collaboration between teams and improved outcomes for the business. The holistic nature of these metrics also forces leaders to look at the entire value stream, making it easier to identify bottlenecks or systemic issues early on.

Leveraging DORA Metrics for Long-Term Innovation

While the initial focus during your DevOps transformation should be on Deployment Frequency and Change Failure Rate, it’s important to recognize the long-term benefits of adding Lead Time for Changes and Time to Restore Service to your evaluation. Once your teams have achieved a healthy rhythm of frequent, reliable deployments, you can start optimizing for faster recovery and shorter change times.

A mature DevOps organization that excels in these areas positions itself to innovate rapidly. By decreasing lead times and recovery times, your team can respond faster to market changes, giving you a competitive edge in industries that demand agility. Over time, these metrics will also reduce technical debt, enabling faster, more reliable development cycles and an enhanced customer experience.

Building a Culture of Accountability with Metrics Pairing

One overlooked aspect of DORA metrics is their ability to promote accountability across teams. By pairing Deployment Frequency with Change Failure Rate, for example, you prevent one team from achieving its goals at the expense of the other. Similarly, pairing Lead Time for Changes with Time to Restore Service encourages teams to both move quickly and fix issues effectively when things go wrong.

This pairing strategy fosters a culture of accountability, where each team is responsible not just for hitting its own goals but also for contributing to the success of the entire delivery pipeline. This mindset shift is crucial for the success of any DevOps transformation. It encourages teams to think beyond their silos and work together toward shared outcomes, resulting in better software and a more collaborative work environment.

Early Wins and Psychological Momentum: The Power of Small Gains

DevOps transformations can be daunting, especially for teams that are already overwhelmed by high workloads and a fast-paced development environment. One strategic benefit of starting with just two metrics—Deployment Frequency and Change Failure Rate—is the opportunity to achieve quick wins.

Quick wins, such as reducing deployment time or lowering failure rates, have a significant psychological impact on teams. By showing progress early in the transformation, you can generate excitement and buy-in across the organization. These wins build momentum, making teams more eager to tackle the larger, more complex challenges that lie ahead in the DevOps journey.

As these small victories accumulate, the organizational culture shifts toward one of continuous improvement, where teams feel empowered to take ownership of their roles in the transformation. This incremental approach reduces resistance to change and ensures that even larger-scale initiatives, such as optimizing Lead Time for Changes and Time to Restore Service, feel achievable and less stressful for teams.

The Role of Leadership in DevOps Success

Leadership plays a critical role in ensuring that DORA metrics are not just implemented but fully integrated into the company’s DevOps practices. To achieve true transformation, leaders must:

• Set the right expectations: Make it clear that the goal of using DORA metrics is not just to “move the needle” but to deliver better software faster. Explain how the metrics contribute to business outcomes.

• Foster a culture of psychological safety: Encourage teams to see failures as learning opportunities. This cultural shift helps improve the Change Failure Rate without resorting to blame or fear.

• Lead by example: Show that leadership is equally committed to the DevOps transformation by adopting new tools, improving communication, and advocating for cross-functional collaboration.

• Provide the right tools and resources: For DORA metrics to be effective, teams need the right tools to measure and act on them. Leaders must ensure their teams have access to automated pipelines, robust monitoring tools, and the support needed to interpret and respond to the data.

Typo: Accelerating Your DevOps Transformation with Streamlined Documentation

In your DevOps journey, the right tools can make all the difference. One often overlooked aspect of DevOps success is the need for effective, transparent documentation that evolves as your systems change. Typo, a dynamic documentation tool, plays a critical role in supporting your transformation by ensuring that everyone—from engineers to operations teams—can easily access, update, and collaborate on essential documents.

Typo helps you:

• Maintain up-to-date documentation that adapts with every deployment, ensuring that your team never has to work with outdated information.

• Reduce confusion during deployments by providing clear, accessible, and centralized documentation for processes and changes.

• Improve collaboration between teams, as Typo makes it easy to contribute and maintain critical project information, supporting transparency and alignment across your DevOps efforts.

With Typo, you streamline not only the technical but also the operational aspects of your DevOps transformation, making it easier to implement and act on DORA metrics while fostering a culture of shared responsibility.

Conclusion: Starting Small, Thinking Big

Starting a DevOps transformation can feel overwhelming, but with the focus on DORA metrics—especially Deployment Frequency and Change Failure Rate—you can begin making meaningful improvements right away. Your organization can smoothly transition into a high-performing, innovative powerhouse by fostering a collaborative culture, aligning team goals, and leveraging tools like Typo for documentation.

The key is starting with what matters most: getting your teams aligned on quality and speed, measuring the right things, and celebrating the small wins along the way. From there, your DevOps transformation will gain the momentum needed to drive long-term success.

‍

‍

‍

In this DORA exclusive webinar, hosted by Kovid from Typo, notable software engineers Dave Farley and Denis Čahuk discuss the profound impact of DORA metrics on engineering productivity.

‍

‍

Dave, co-author of 'Continuous Delivery,' emphasized the transition to continuous delivery (CD) and its significant benefits, involving systematic quality improvements and efficient software release cycles. Denis, a technical coach and TDD/DDD expert, shared insights into overcoming resistance to CD adoption. The discussion covered the challenges associated with measuring productivity, differentiating between continuous delivery and continuous deployment, and the essential role of team dynamics in successful implementation. The session also addressed audience questions about balancing speed and quality, using DORA metrics effectively, and handling burnout and engineering well-being.

Timestamps

• 00:00 - Introduction

• 00:14 - Meet the Experts: Dave Farley and Denis Čahuk

• 01:01 - Dave Farley's Journey and Hobbies

• 02:38 - Denis Čahuk's Passion for Problem Solving

• 06:37 - Challenges in Adopting Continuous Delivery

• 11:34 - Engineering Mindset and Continuous Improvement

• 14:54 - Measuring Success with DORA Metrics

• 25:38 - Addressing Burnout and Team Performance

• 32:33 - The Benefits of Ensemble Programming

• 33:34 - ThoughtWorks and Lean Development

• 34:45 - Social Variants in Agile Practices

• 36:52 - Continuous Delivery and Team Well-being

• 42:59 - The Importance of TDD and Pairing

• 46:45 - Q&A Session

• 01:00:09 - Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Links and Mentions

• Dave Farley on Linkedin

• Denis Čahuk on Linkedin

• Kovid Batra on Linkedin

• Watch this webinar on YouTube and Substack

• Listen on Spotify, Amazon Music, and iTunes/Apple Podcasts

‍

Transcript

‍

Kovid Batra: All right. So time to get started. Uh, thanks for joining in for this DORA exclusive webinar, The Hows and Whats of DORA session three, powered by Typo. I am Kovid, founding member at Typo and your host for today's webinar. With me today, I have two extremely passionate software engineers. Please welcome the DORA expert tonight, Dave Farley. Dave is a co-author of award-winning books, Continuous Delivery, Modern Software Engineering, and a pioneer in DevOps. Along with him, we have the technical coach, Denis Čahuk, who is TDD, DDD expert, and he is a stress-free high-performance development culture provider in the tech teams. Welcome to the show, both of you. Thank you so much for joining in.

Dave Farley: Pleasure. Thank you for having me.

Denis Čahuk: Thank you for having me.

Kovid Batra: Great guys. So I think we will take it one by one. Uh, so let's, let's, let's start with, uh, I think, uh, Dave first. Uh, so Dave, uh, this is a ritual that we follow on this webinar. You have to tell us about yourself, uh, that your LinkedIn profile doesn't tell. So you have to give us a quick, sweet intro about yourself.

Dave Farley: Okay. Um, I'm a long-time software developer who really enjoys problem-solving. I really enjoy that aspect of the job. I, if you want, if you want to get me, get me to come and work at your place, you tell me that the problem's hard to solve. And that's, that's the kind of stuff that I like, and I've spent much of my career doing some of those hard to solve problems and figuring out ways in which to make that easier.

Kovid Batra: Great. All right. So I think, Dave, uh, apart from that, uh, anything that you love beyond software engineering that you enjoy doing?

Dave Farley: Yeah, my wife says that my hobby is collecting hobbies. So, so I'm, I'm a guitarist. I used to, I used to play in rock bands years ago. Um, I, until fairly recently, I was a member of the British aerobatics team, flying competition aerobatics in a 300 horsepower, plus 10, minus 10 G, uh, aerobatic airplane, which, which was awesome, but, uh, I don't do that anymore. I've stopped very recently.

Kovid Batra: That's amazing, man. That's really amazing. Great. Thank you. Thank you so much for that, uh, intro about yourself and, uh, Denis over to you, man.

Denis Čahuk: Um, like Dave, I really like problem solving, but, but I like involving, uh, I spent the beginning of my career in focusing too much on the compiler and I like focusing on the human problems as well. So how, what, what makes the team tick and in particular with TDD, it really, really scratched an itch about what makes teams resistant and what makes teams a little bit more open to change and improvement and dialogue, especially dialogue. Uh, that has become my specialty since. So yes, I brand myself as a TDD, DDD coach, but that's primarily there to drive engagement. I'm, I'm super interested in engineering leadership and specifically what drives trends and what helps people, what helps, uh, engineers, engineering teams overcome their own resistance, sort of, if they're in their own way, you know, why is that there, how to, how to resolve any kind of, um, blockers, let's say, human blockers, not, not, not the compiler kind, uh, in engineering things. I don't plan any planes, but I do have, I do share, uh, Dave's passion for music. So I do have a guitar and, uh, the drum there behind me. So whenever I'm not streaming or coding, I am jamming out as much as I can.

Kovid Batra: Perfect. Perfect, man. All right. So I think it's time we get started and move to the, to move to the main section. Uh, so the first thing that I love to talk to you, uh, Dave first, uh, so you have this, uh, YouTube channel, uh, and it's not in your name, right? It's, it's Continuous Delivery. Uh, what, what makes Continuous Delivery so important to you?

Dave Farley: Somebody else said to, this to me very recently, which, which I agree with, which is that I think that Continuous Delivery, without seeming too immodest, because my name's associated with it, but I think it represents a step change in what we can do as software developers. I think it's a significant step forward in our ability to create better software faster. If you embrace the ideas of continuous delivery, which includes things like test-driven development, in DDD, as Denis was describing, and is very team-centered as well, which Denis was also talking about. If you, if you embrace those ideas and adopt the disciplines of continuous delivery, which fundamentally, all devolve into one idea, which is working software is always in a releasable state, then you get quite dramatically better outcomes. And I think without too much fear of contradiction, continuous delivery represents the state of the art in software development. It's what the best organizations at software development do. And so, I think it's an important idea and it's as I said, although I sound rather immodest because I'm one of the people that helped at least put the language to it, but people were doing these things, but Jez, Jez and my book define the language around which continuous delivery talking is usually structured these days. Um, and so, so I think it's an important idea and I think that software engineering is one of the most important things that we do in our society and it matters a lot and we ought to be better at it as an industry and I think that this is how we get better at it. So, so I get an awful lot of job satisfaction and personal pleasure on trying to help people on their journey towards achieving continuous delivery.

Kovid Batra: And I think you're being just modest here. Your book just didn't define or give a language there. It did way, way more than that. And, uh, kudos to you for that. Uh, I think my next question would be like, what's that main ingredient, uh, that separates a team following CD and a team not following CD? What do you think makes the big difference there?

Dave Farley: There are some easy answers. Let me just tackle the difficult answer first, because I think the difficulty with continuous delivery is that the idea is simple, but it's so challenging to most people that it's very difficult to adopt. It challenges the way in which we think about software. I think it challenges to some degree. I'm a bit of a pop psychologist. I think in many ways it challenges, um, our very understanding of what software is to some extent, and certainly what software development is. And that's difficult. That means that it changes every person's role in undertaking this. It, as I said already, it's a much more team centered approach, I think, uh, to be able to achieve this permanent releasability of our software. But fundamentally, I think if you want to boil it down to more straightforward concepts to think about, I think that what we're talking about here is kind of applying what I think of as a kind of scientific rationalism to solving problems in software. And so the biggest part of that, the two biggest ideas there, from my point of view, are working in small steps and essentially, treating each of those steps as a little experiment and assuming that we're going to be wrong. So it's always one of the big ideas in science is that you start off assuming that your ideas are wrong, and then you try and figure out how and why they're wrong. I think we do the same thing in continuous delivery and software engineering, modern software engineering. We try to figure out how can we detect where our ideas are wrong, and then we try and detect where they're wrong, in those places and find out if they're wrong or not and then correct them. And that's how we build a better software. And so this, I think that goes quite deep and it affects quite a lot about how we undertake our work. But I think that one of the step changes in capability is that I think that previous thinking about software development kind of started off from the assumption that our job is to get everything perfectly right from the start. And that's simply irrational and impossible. And so, instead of taking a more scientific mindset and starting off assuming that we will be wrong, and so we give ourselves the freedom to be wrong and the ability to um, recover from it easily is almost the whole game.

Kovid Batra: Got it. I think Denis has a question. He wants to, yeah, please go ahead.

Denis Čahuk: Sure. I'm going to go off script. I think I like that distinction of psychologist. Sometimes I feel myself, find myself in a similar role. And I think the core disagreement comes from this idea of a lot of engineers, organizational owners, CTOs don't like this idea that their code is an experiment. They want some like certain assurances that it has been inspected and that it's, it's not, it's not something that we expect to fail. So from their perspective, non-CD adopters think that the scientific rationale is hard inspection towards requirements rather than conducting an experiment. And I see that, um, sort of providing a lot of resistance regarding CD adoption cause it is very hard to do, or it's very hard to come from that rationale and say, okay, we're now doing CD, but we're not doing CD right now. We're adopting CD right now. So we're kind of doing it, but not doing it. And it just creates a lot of tension and resistance in companies. Did you find similar situations? How do you, how do you sort of massage this sort of identity shift identity crisis?

Dave Farley: Yeah. Yeah I think, I think absolutely that's a thing and, and that is the challenge. It is that is to try and find ways to help those people to see the light. So I know I sound like an evangelist. Yeah, but, but I guess I see that as part of my role. But..

Denis Čahuk: You did write the book, so..

Dave Farley: Yeah, so, so, so I think this is in everybody's interest. I mean, the data backs me up. The DORA data says that if you adopt the practices of continuous delivery, you spend 44 percent as an organization more time on building new features than if you don't. That's pretty slam dunk in terms of value as far as I'm concerned, and there's lots more to it than that. But, you know, so why wouldn't anybody want to be able to build better software faster? And this is the best way that we know of so far, how to do that. So, so that seems like a reasonably rational way of deciding that this is a good idea, but that's not enough to change people's minds. And you've got to change people's minds in all sorts of different ways. Um, I think it's important to make these sorts of things, but going back to those people that you said that, you know, engineers who think it's their job to get it right first time, they don't understand what engineering is. Managers who want to build the software more quickly, get more features out. They don't understand what building software more quickly really means because if either of those groups knew those things, they'd be shouting out and demanding continuous delivery, because it's the thing that you need. We don't know the right answers first time. Look at any technology. Let alone any product and its history. Look at the aeroplane. In the first aeroplane that could carry a person under power in a controllable way was the Wright Flyer in 1903. And for the first 20 or 30 years, all aeroplanes were death traps. People were, they were such dangerous devices. But engineering as a discipline adopted an incremental approach to learning and discovery to improve the airplane. And by 2017, two thirds of the planet, the equivalent of two thirds of the population of the planet, flew in commercial airliners and nobody was killed. That's what engineering does. It's an incremental process. It doesn't, we don't, we never ever, ever get it right first time. The iPhone, the first iPhone didn't have an app store, didn't have a camera, didn't have Siri, didn't have none of these things, didn't..

Denis Čahuk: Multitasking.

Dave Farley: Didn't have multitasking, all of these things. And now we have these amazing devices in our pockets that can do all sorts of amazing things that the original designers of the iPhone didn't actually predict. I'm sure that they had vague wishes in their minds, but they didn't predict them ahead of time. That's not how engineering works. So the way that engineering works is by exploration and discovery. And we need to, to be good at it, we need to organize to be good at exploration and discovery. And the way that, you know, so if we want to build things more efficiently, then we would, we need to adopt the disciplines that allow us to make these mistakes and accept that we will and look, you know, detect them as quickly as we can and learn from them as quickly as we can. And that's, you know, that's why, to my mind, you know, the results of the DORA thing, so there's no trade-off between speed and quality because you work in these small steps, you get faster feedback on, on whether your ideas are good or bad. So those small steps are important. And then when you find out that they're a bad idea, you correct them. And that's how you get to good.

Kovid Batra: Totally. I think, uh, one very good point, uh, here, we are sure like now CD and other practices like TDD impact engineering in a very positive way, improving the overall productivity and actually delivering value and the slam dunk like 44 percent more value delivered, right? But when it really comes to proving that number to these teams, uh, do you, like, do you use any framework? Do you use like DORA or SPACE to tell whether implementing CD was effective in a way? How do you measure that impact?

Dave Farley: No, most, mostly I recommend that people use the DORA metrics. Um, I, let me just talk momentarily about that because I think that that's important. I think the work of Nicole and the rest of the team in starting off the DORA was close to genius in identifying, as far as I can think of, the only generic measures in software. If you think about what, what the, the DORA metrics of stability and throughput measure, um, it's, um, the quality of the software that we produce and the rate at which we can produce software of that quality. That stability is the quality. Throughput is the efficiency with which we can produce software of that quality. Those are fundamental. They say nothing at all about the nature of the problem we're solving, the technology we're using, or anything else. If you're writing, if you're configuring SAP to do a better job of whatever it is that you're trying to do, that's still a good measure of success, stability and throughput. Um, if I'm writing some low-level code for an operating system, that's still a good measure of success. It doesn't matter. So, so we have these generic measures. Now they aren't enough to measure everything that's important in software. What they do is that they tell us whether we're building software right. They don't tell us whether we're building the right software, for example. So we need different kinds of experiments to understand other aspects of software. But I don't think there's much else. There's nothing else that I can think of that's in the same category. Stability and throughput in terms of the generosity of those measurements. And so, if you want a place to start of what to measure, start with stability and throughput and then figure out how to measure the other things out because they're going to be dependent on your context.

I'm a big fan of Site Reliability Engineering as a model for this. It talks in terms of, um, um, SLOs and SLIs, Service Level Indicators and Service Level Objectives. So the Service Level Indicator is what measure will determine the success of this service. So you identify, for every single feature, you identify what you should measure to know whether it's good or not. And then you set an objective of what score on that scale you want to achieve for this thing. That's a good way of measuring things, but it's kinda difficult. The huge difference is it's completely contextual, not even application by application, but feature by feature. So one feature might improve the latency, another feature might improve the rate at which we recruit new customers. And we've got to figure out, you know, that's how we get experimental with those kinds of things, by being more specific about and targeted with what we measure. I am skeptical of most of the generic measures. Not because I don't want them, it's just that I don't think that most of the others are generic and do what we want them to. Um, I'm not quite sure what I make of the SPACE framework, which is Nicole's new work on measuring developer, developer productivity. She's very smart and very good at the research-driven stuff. Uh, I spoke to her about some of this stuff on my, my podcast and, um, she had interesting things to say about it. I am still nervous of measuring individual developer productivity because as Denis said in his introduction, one of the really important things is how well a team works. So I think modern software development. unless it's building something trivial usually, is a team game. It's a matter of people coming together and organizing themselves in a way to be able to achieve some goal. And that takes an awful lot, and you can have people working with different levels of skill, experience, diligence, who may be still contributing strongly to the team, even if they're not pulling their weight in other respects. So I think it's a complicated thing to measure, a very human thing to measure. So, so I'm a bit suspect of that, but I'm fairly confident that Nicole will have some data that proves me wrong. But I, you know, that's, that's my position so far.

Kovid Batra: Totally makes sense. I think with almost all the frameworks, there have been some level of challenges and so is with DORA, SPACE, but I think in your experience, when, when you have seen, uh, and you have helped teams implement such practices, uh, what do you think have become the major reasons where they get stuck, not implementing these frameworks, not implementing proper engineering metrics? What, what, what stops them from doing it? What stops them from adopting it?

Dave Farley: I think specifically with using DORA, um, there are some complexities. If you, if you, if you are in a, a regular kind of organization that hasn't been working in the ways in which we've been talking about so far, um, then measuring stuff, just, just measuring stuff is hard. You're not used to doing it. The number of organizations that I talked to that couldn't even tell you how much, excuse me, time was spent on a feature, they don't measure it. They don't know. And so just getting the basics in, the thinking in, to be able to start to be a little bit more quantitative on these things is hard. And that's hard for people like us probably to get our heads around a little bit because when you've got a working deployment pipeline, this stuff is actually pretty easy because you just instrument your deployment pipeline and it gives you all the answers pretty much. So I think that there's that kind of practical difficulty, but I don't think that's the big ticket problem. The big ticket problem is just the mindset, my, I am old enough and comfortable enough in my shoes to recognize that I'm a grumpy old man. Um, and part of my grumpy old manness is to look at our industry and think that our industry is largely a fashion industry. It's not a technical industry. And there's an awful lot of mythology that goes on in the software industry. That's simply nothing to do with doing a good job. It's just what everybody thinks everybody else is doing. And I think that's incredibly common. And you've got to overcome that because if you're talking to a team, I'm going to trample on some people's sacred cow right now, but if you're talking to a team that works with feature branching, the evidence is in. Feature branching doesn't work as well as trunk-based development. That's more learning that we got from the DORA metrics, measuring those. Teams that work with feature branches build slightly lower quality code and they do it slightly more slowly than teams working on trunk. Now the problem is, is that it's almost inconceivable how you can do trunk-based development safely to people that buy into the, what I would think of as the mythology of feature branching. The fact that it, it, you can do it safely and you can do it safely at scale with complicated software, they start to deny because they assume that, that, that you can't, because they can't think of how you would do it. And that's the kind of difficulty that, that you face. It's not that it's a rational way of thinking about it, because I, I think it's very easy to defend why trunk-based development and continuous integration are more true, more, more, more accurate. You know, you, you organize things so that there's one point of truth. And in feature branching, you don't have one point of truth, you have multiple points of truth. And so it's clear that it's easier to determine whether the one point of truth is correct than deciding that multiple points of truth, that you don't know how you're going to integrate them together yet, is correct. You can't tell.

So it's, it's, it's tricky. So I think that there are rational ways of thinking that help us to do this, which is why I started, I've started to think about and talk about what we do as engineering more than as craft or just software development. If we do it well, uh, it's engineering and if we do it well and use engineering, we get a better result, which is kind of the definition of what engineering is in another discipline. If we work in certain ways, we do get better results. I think that's important stuff. So it's very, very hard to convince people and to get them away from their, what I would think of as mythologies sometimes. Um, and it's also difficult to be able to have these kinds of conversations and not seem very dogmatic. I get accused of being dogmatic about this stuff all of the time. Being arrogant for a moment. I think there's a big difference between being dogmatic and being right. I, I think that if we talk about, you know, having evidence like the DORA metrics, having a model like the way that I describe how these things stitch together and the reasons why they work and just having a favorite way of doing things, there's a difference between those things. I don't like continuous integration because it's my favorite. I like continuous integration because it works better than anything else. I like TDD not because I think it's my ideal for designing software. It's just that it's a better way of designing software than anything else. That's my belief. And, and so it's difficult to have these kinds of conversations because inevitably, you know, my viewpoints are going to be covered, colored by my experiences and what I've seen. But I try hard to be honest myself as an aspiring engineer and scientific rationalist. I try to be true to myself and try to critique my own ideas to find the holes in them. And I think that's the best that we can do in terms of staying sane on these things.

Kovid Batra: Sure. I think on that note, I think Denis would also resonate with that fact, because last time when Denis and I were talking, he mentioned about how he's helping teams implement TDD and like taking away those roadblocks time to time. So I'm sure Denis has certain questions around that, and he would like to jump in. Denis, uh, do you have any questions?

Denis Čahuk: I have a few, actually, I need your help a little bit to stay on topic. Um, so Dave mentioned something really important that sort of touched me more than the rest, which is this sort of concern for measuring individual performance. And I've been following Nicole's work as well, um, especially with SPACE metrics and what the team topology community is doing now with flow engineering. Um, there, there is a, let's say, strong interest in the community and the engineering intelligence community to measure burnout, to measure.

Dave Farley: Mm-Hmm.

Denis Čahuk: So, so the, so to clarify, do we have a high-performing team that's burnt out or do we have a healthy team that's low-performing? And to really, and to really sort of start course correct in the right areas is very difficult to measure burnout without being individual because of the need for it to be a subjective experience. Um, and I share Dave's concern where the productivity metrics are being put in the same bucket as the psychological safety and burnout research. So, I'm wondering when you're dealing with teams, because I see this with product engineering, I see this with TDD, I see this with engineering leaders who are just resistant to this idea of, you know, are we burned out? Are we just tired and we're following the right process? Or is the process correct, but it's being implemented incorrectly? How do you, how do you navigate this rift? I mean, specifically, do you find any quick, uh, lagging indicators from the DORA metrics to help you a little bit, like to cajole the conversation a little bit more? Um, or do you go to other metrics, like SPACE metrics, et cetera, to sort of, or surveying to help you start some kind of continuous delivery initiative? So a lot of teams who are not doing CD, they do complain about burnout when they're sort of being asked to start just measuring everything, just out of, um, out of, I would say, fatigue.

Dave Farley: Yeah, and, and, uh, and, uh, it gets to the, uh, Matt and Manuel's thing from the team, the Team Topologies guys, you know, uh, uh, description of cognitive load. I know it's not their, their, their idea originally, but, but, but applying it to software teams. It's, it, I, I think burnout is primarily a matter of, a mix of cognitive load and excessive cognitive load and the freedom to direct your own destiny within a team, you know? You need, you need kind of the Daniel Pink thing, autonomy, mastery and purpose. You need freedom to do a good job. You need enough scope to be, and, and that those are the kinds of things that I think are important in terms of measuring high-performance teams. I think that it's a false correlation. Um, I know that recent versions of the, the DORA reports have thrown up some, what seemed to me to be, um, counterintuitive findings. So people saying things like working with continuous integration has, is correlated with increased levels of burnout. That makes no sense to me. I put this to, to Nicole when I spoke to her as well, and she was a little skeptical of that too, in terms of the methodology for collecting the data. That's no, it's no aspersion on the people. We all get these things wrong from time to time, but I'm distrustful of that result. But if that is the result, you know, I've got to change my views on things. But my experience, and that's in the absence of, of hard data, except that previous versions of DORA gave us hard data and now the finding seems to have changed. But my experience has been that teams that are good at continuous delivery don't burn out, because it's, it's sustainable. It's long-term sustainable. The LMAX team that, that I led in the beginning of that team have been going, how long is it now? Uh, about 15 years. And those, those people weren't burning, people weren't burning out, you know, and they're producing high-quality software still, um, and their process is working still. Um, so I I'm not, I, I think that mostly burnout is a symptom of something being wrong. Um, and something being wrong in terms of too much cognitive load and not enough control of your own destiny within the team. Now, that's complicated stuff to do well, and it gets into some of the, for want of a better term, softer things, the less technical aspects of organizing teams and leading teams and so on. So we need leaders that are inspirational, that can kind of set a vision and a direction, and also demonstrating the, the right behavior. So going home on time, not, not working all hours and, you know, not telling people off if things go wrong, if it's not their fault, and all these kinds of things. So we need.. The best teams in my experience, take a lot of personal responsibility for their work, but that's, that's doing it themselves. That's not externally forced on them, and that's a good thing because that makes you both be prouder of the things that you do and more committed to doing a good job, which is in everybody's interest.

So, so I think there's, I think there's quite a lot to this. And again, it's, none of it's easy, but I think that shaping to be able to keep our software in a releasable state and working in small steps, gathering feedback, focusing on learning all of those techniques, the kind of things that I talk about all the time are some of the tools that help us to at least have a better chance of reducing burnout. Now that, there are always going to be some individuals in any system that get burnt out for other reasons. You get burnt out because of pressures from home or because your dog died or whatever it might be. Um, but, you know, we need, we need to treat this stuff seriously because we need to take care of people even if that's only for pragmatic commercial reasons, that we don't want to burn people because that's not going to be good for us long term as an industry. I, I, I, that's not more the primary reason why I would do it. But if I'm talking to a hard-nosed commercial person, I still think it's in their interest to treat people well. And so, and so we need to be cautious of people and more caring of people in the workplace. It's one of the things that I think that ensemble programming, whether it's pairing or mobbing, are significantly better for, and probably that's counterintuitive to many people, because there's a degree to which pair programming in particular applies a bit of extra pressure. You're a bit more on your game. You get a bit more, more tired at the end of each day's work, but you also build better friendships amongst your, your, your team workers and you learn from one another more effectively and you can depend on one another. If you're having a bad day, your, your, your pair might pick up the pace and be, you know, sustaining productivity or whatever else. There are all these kinds of subtle complex interactions that go on to producing a healthy workspace where, where people can keep at it for a long, you know, a long time, years at a time. And I, I think that's really important.

I worked at a company called ThoughtWorks in, in the early 2000s, and during that period, ThoughtWorks and ThoughtWorks in London in particular where I worked, where I think some of the thought leaders in agile thinking, we were pushing the boundaries of agile projects at that time and doing all sorts of interesting things. So we experimented a lot. We tried out lots of different, you know, leading edge, bleeding edge, often ideas in, in development. One of those, I worked on one of the early teams in London that was doing full-blown lean and applying that to software development. Um, and one of the things that we found was that that tended to, to, to burn us out a little bit over months because it just started to feel a bit like a treadmill. There was no kind of cadence to it because you just pick up a feature off the Kanban board, you'd work on that feature, you'd deliver the feature, you'd showcase the feature, you'd pick the next feature and you'd, and so on and so on and so on, and that was it. And you did that for months on end. And we were, we were, we were building good software. We were mostly having a good time, but over, over time it made us tired. So we started to think about how to make more social variants in the way in which we could do things. And we ended up doing the same thing, but also having iterations or most people would call them 'sprints' these days, of two weeks so that we could have a party at the end and celebrate the things that we did release, even though we weren't committing to what we'd release in the next two weeks. And, you know, we'd have some cake and stuff like that at the end, and all of those sorts of human things that just made it feel a little bit more different. We could celebrate our success and forget about our losses. Software development is a human endeavor. Let's not forget that and not try and talk, turn us into cogs in a machine. Let's treat us like human beings. Sorry. I'm off-road. I'm not sure if I answered your question.

Denis Čahuk: This is great. This is great, Dave. No need to apologize. We're enjoying this and I think our audiences as well.

Kovid Batra: I'm sure. All right. So, Denis, uh, do you have any other question?

Denis Čahuk: Well, I would like to follow up with what the story with the, with the ThoughtWorks story that Dave just mentioned You know, you mentioned you had evidence of high performance in that team. You know, we tend to forget that lean is primarily a product concern, not an engineering concern. So it sort of has to go through the ringer and to make sure, you know, does it apply to software engineering as well? And I have similar findings with things like lean, things like Kanban, particularly Scrum or the bad ways of doing Scrum is that it is, it can, it can show evidence of high performance, but not sustainably due to its lack of social component. And the retrospectives are a lame excuse at social components. It's just forcing people to judge each other and usually produces negative results rather than positive ones. So I'm wondering, you just mentioned this two-week iteration cycle for increments, but also you're leaning towards small batches. Are you still adamant on like this two-week barrier for social engagement? So, so, so what we There does seem to be a difference.

Dave Farley: Yeah, so, so, so what we did is that we retained the lean kind of Kanban style planning. We just kept that as it was, but we kind of overlaid a two-week schedule where we would have a kickoff meeting at the start of an iteration, and we would have a little retrospective at the end of an iteration and we, you know, we would talk about the work that we did over that period. So, so we had this, this kind of different cycle and that was purely human stuff. It wasn't even visible really outside of the team. It was just the way that we organized our work so that we could just look ahead for, for, for what's coming downstream as far as our Kanban board said today, and look back at what, what, what we'd, you know, what we delivered over the pre, you know, the previous iteration. It was just that kind of thing. And that was enough to give us this more human cycle, you know, because we could be, we could be looking forward to, so I'm releasing this feature, we're nearly at the end, you know, we'll talk about that tomorrow or whatever else it is, you know, and it was just nice to kind of reconnect with the rest of the team in that way. And it just, we used it essentially, I suppose you could pragmatically look at it as just as a meeting schedule for, for, for the team-level stuff. I suppose you could look at it like that, but it was, it felt like a bit more, more than that to us. But I've, by default, if I'm in a position to control these things, that's how I've organized teams ever since. And that, that's how, that's how we worked at LMAX where we built our financial exchange. That's the organization that's been going for 15 odd years, um, doing this real high-performance version of continuous delivery.

Denis Čahuk: But to pick your brain, uh, Dave, sorry to interject. When you said, you separated out the work cycles from the social cycles, that does involve daily deployments, right? Like daily pairing, daily deployments. So the releases were separate from the meeting, uh, routine.

Dave Farley: Yes. Yeah, so, so, so we, we were, we were doing the, we were doing the, the, the, the Kanban continuous delivery kind of thing of when a feature was finished, it was ready to go. So, so we were working that way. Um, there was some limitations on that sometimes, but, but, but pretty much that, that's a very close approximation have been an accurate statement, at least. Um, so, so we, we were working that way. Yeah. So we'd really, we'd essentially release on demand. We'd, we'd release when, you know, at every point when we were ready. And that was more often, usually, than once every two weeks. So the releases weren't, weren't forced to be aligned with those two week schedules. So it wasn't a technical thing at all. It was, uh, it was primarily a team social thing, but, but it worked. It worked very well.

Denis Čahuk: I really liked the brief mention about SPACE and Nicole's other work. Kovid and I are very active in the Google community. It's sort of organizing DORA-related events. And Google does have a very heavy interest in measuring well-being, measuring burnout, or just, you know, trying to figure out whether engineers and managers are actually really contributing or whether they're just slowing things down. And it's very hard to just judge from DORA metrics alone, or at least to get a clearer picture. Um, is there anything else you use for situational awareness? What would you recommend for either evidence of micromanagement, or maybe the team wants to do TDD, but there's sort of an anti-pairing stigma, if you have to, how would you approach, um, the sort of more survey-oriented, SPACE-oriented?

Dave Farley: From my experience, and I'm saying that with reservations, not with not, not, not boasting. I'm not saying because I've got great experience, but, but from my experience, I, I'm a little bit wary of trying to find quantity of ways of evaluating those things. These are very human things. So stuff like some of the examples that you mentioned, I, I've spent a significant proportion of my career as a leader of technical teams and I've always thought that it was a failure on my part as a leader of a technical team if I don't know, notice that somebody's struggling or that somebody's not pulling their weight or, or I haven't got the kind of relation, relationship where the team, if I, if I don't, if I don't know something, the team doesn't come and tell me and then I can help. I'm kind of in a weird position, for example, I'm in a slightly weird position in terms of career reviews. I think that as a manager or a leader, if you don't know the stuff that you find out in a review, you're not doing your job. You should be knowing that stuff all of the time. And it's kind of the Gemba thing. It's kind of walking around and being with the team. It's it's spending time and understanding the team as a member of the team because that's what you are. You're not outside it. You're not different. You're a member of the team, so you should feel part of that and you should be there to help, help people guide their careers and steer them in the right direction of doing better and doing, doing good things from their point of view and from the organization's point of view. But to do that, you've got, you've got to understand a little bit about what's going on. And that feels like one of those very, very human things. It's about empathy, and it's about understanding. It's about communication, and it's about trust between, between the people. And I'm not quite sure how well you can quantify that stuff.

Denis Čahuk: I coach teams primarily through this kind of engagement, to rebuild trust.

Dave Farley: Yes.

Denis Čahuk: So I have found I have zero success rate in adopting TDD if the team isn't prepared to pair on it.

Dave Farley: Yeah.

Denis Čahuk: Once the team is pairing, once the team is assembling, TDD, continuous delivery, trunk-based\ development, no problem. Once they're prepared to sort of invest time into each other, just form friendships or if nothing else, cordial acquaintances, sort of, we can sort of, bridge that gap of, well, I want you to write a test so that he can go home and spend time with his kids without worrying about deployment. So that, that is the ulterior motive, not that there is some like, you know, fairytale fashion metric to tick a box on.

Dave Farley: Yeah.

Denis Čahuk: Um, since you mentioned quantitative metrics, to sort of backtrack a little bit on that and tie it together with TDD, did you find any lagging indicators of a team that, that did adopt TDD after you came in that, you know, what, what are the key metrics that are getting better, different after TDD adoption, or maybe leading indicators or perhaps leading indicators that say, hey, this more than anything else needs attention?

Dave Farley: So, so, so, so I think, I think, I think mostly, uh, stability. So, so it's a lagging indicator, but I, I think that's the measure that, you know, tells us whether you're doing a good enough job on quality. And if you're not doing TDD, mostly the data says you're not doing a good enough job on quality. There's a lot of other measures that kind of reinforce that picture, but fundamentally in terms of monitoring our performance day-to-day, I think stability is the best tool for that. Um, and, you know, so, so some, you know, so there's, I, I, I'm interested as a technologist from a technical point of view in some of the work that, um, Adam Thornhill, uh, uh, and code scene are doing in terms of red code and things like that. So patterns of use in code, the stuff that changes a lot and monitoring the stuff that changes a lot versus this stuff that, you know, where, where defects happen and all that kind of stuff. And so, you know, the crossover between sort of cyclomatic complexity and other measures of complexity in code and the need to change it a lot and all that kind of stuff. I think that's all interesting and kind of, but I see that as reinforcing this view of how important quality is. And fundamentally, we need to find ways of doing less work, managing our cognitive load to achieve higher quality, and that's what TDD does. So TDD isn't the end in itself. It's, it's a tool that gives us, that pushes us in the direction of the end that matters, which is building high-quality software and maintaining our ability to change it. And that's, again, that's what TDD does. So, so, so I think that TDD influences software in some deep ways that people that don't practice TDD miss all of the time.

And it's linked to lots of other practices. Like you said, um, you know, pairing is a great way of helping to introduce TDD, uh, particularly for our people that already know how to do TDD in the team. That's, that's the way that you spread it, certainly, but it's, I can't, I can't think of many things that, that, as I say, I'm wary of measures. I tend to either use tactical measures that just seem right in the context of what we're doing now, sort of treating each thing as an experiment and trying to figure out how to experiment on this thing and what do I need to measure to, to do that, or I use stability and throughput primarily.

Kovid Batra: Uh, I'll just, uh, take a pause here for all of us because, uh, we have a QnA lined up for the audience. And, uh, we will try to take like 30, 30 seconds of a break here and, uh, audience, you can get started, posting your questions. Uh, we are ready to take them.

Denis Čahuk: We already have a few comments and we had, uh,

Kovid Batra: Okay. I think, uh, we can start with the questions.

Denis Čahuk: Before we go into Paul's question. Paul has a great question. I just want to preface that by saying that not this one, the DORA-related one.

Kovid Batra: But I like this one more.

Denis Čahuk: Yes.

Kovid Batra: Dave, I think you have to answer this one. Uh, where do you get your array of t-shirts?

Dave Farley: So, so, so mostly I buy my t-shirts off a company based in Ireland called QWERTEE. "QWERTEE". And if you go to, if you go to any of my videos, there's usually a link underneath them where you can get a discount off the t-shirts because we did a deal with QWERTEE because, because so many people commented on my t-shirts.

Denis Čahuk: Great t-shirts. Well done.

Kovid Batra: Yeah. Denis.

Denis Čahuk: I just wanted to, I just wanted to preface Paul's other question regarding how to measure that, you know, Kovid and I are very active in the DORA communities on the Google, Google group, and by far the most asked questions are, how do I precisely measure X? How do I correctly measure this? My team does not follow continuous delivery. We have feature branches. How do I correctly measure this metric, that metric? Before we go into too much detail, I just wanna emphasize that if you're not measuring, if you're not doing continuous delivery, then the metrics will tell you that you should probably be doing continuous delivery. And..

Dave Farley: Yeah.

Denis Čahuk: The ulterior motive is how can we get to continuous delivery sooner? Not how can we correctly measure DORA metrics and continue doing feature branching. Yeah, that's that is generally the most trending conversation topic on these groups. And I just want to take a lot of time to sort of nail, like the, it's about the business. It's about continuous delivery, running experiments quickly, smoother, safely, sustainably, rather than directly measuring any kind of dysfunctional workflow. Or even if you can judge that your workflow is bad because the metrics don't track properly, which is usually where people turn towards DORA metrics.

Dave Farley: Yeah, I would add to that as well is that even if you, even if you get the measures and you use the measures, you're still not going to convince people it's the measures enough alone aren't enough. You need, you need to approach this from a variety of different directions to start convincing people to change their minds over things, and that's without being disrespectful from those, of those people that differ in terms of their viewpoints, because it's hard to change your mind about something if you've, if you've made a career working in a certain way, it's hard to change the things that from the things that you've learned. Um, so this is challenging, and that's the downside of continuous delivery. It works better than anything else. It's the most fun way of organizing our work. It does tend to eliminate, in my experience, burnout in teams, all of these good things. You build better software more quickly working this way. But it's hard to adopt when you're not, when you've not done it before. Everybody that I know that's tried likes it better, but it's hard to make the change.

Denis Čahuk: It's a worthwhile change that manages a lot of stress and burnout, but that doesn't mean there aren't difficult conversations along the way.

Dave Farley: Sure.

Kovid Batra: All right, uh, moving on to the next one. Uh, how do you find the right balance between speed and quality while delivering software?

Dave Farley: The DORA metrics answer this question. There is no trade off, so there is no need to balance. If you want more speed, you need to build with higher quality. If you want more quality, you need to build faster. So let's just, let's just explain that a little bit because I think it's useful to just have this idea in mind because, because we have to defend ourselves because it seems, it seems like a reasonable idea that there's a trade off between speed and quality. It's just not true. But it seems like a reasonable idea. So, so if I build bad software this week and then next week, I've got a load more pressure on me to build next week's work, next week, I'm going to have all of that pressure plus all of the cost of the bad software that I wrote this week. So it's obviously more efficient if I build good software this week and then I don't have that work next week and then I could build good software next week as well. And what that plays out to is that that's where the 44 percent comes from. That's where the increase in productivity comes from. If we concentrate and organize our work to build higher quality software, we save time. We don't, we don't waste, we don't, it doesn't cost time.

Now there's a transition period. If you're busy working in a poor software development environment, that's building crap software, then, you know, it's going to take you a while to learn some of these things. So there's, there's an activation energy to get better at building software. But once you do, you will be going faster and building higher quality software at the same time because they come together. So what do we mean by fast when we talk about going fast if you want high quality software? Fundamentally, that's about working in smaller steps. So we want to organize our work into much smaller steps so that after each small step, we can evaluate where we are and whether what, whether that step that we took was, was a good one. And that's in all kinds of ways. Does my software do what I think it does? Does it do what the customer wants it to do? Is it making money in production or whatever else it is? So, so all of these things, you know, these are learning points and we need to build that more experimental mindset into the, in deep, into the way that we work.

And the smart thing to do. To optimize all of this is to make it easy to do the right things. It makes it, make it easy for us to carry out these small steps in these experiments. And that's what continuous delivery does. That's what the deployment pipeline fundamentally is for. It's an experimental platform that will give us a definitive statement on the releasability of our software multiple times per day. And that makes it easier then to, to work, to work in these small steps and do that quickly and, and get high quality results back.

Kovid Batra: Totally makes sense. Moving on, uh, Agustin, uh, why is it so, why is it so important in your opinion to differentiate between continuous delivery, continuous deployment, and how that affects the delivery process performance, also known as the DORA metrics?

Dave Farley: So, so, so, so let me first differentiate between them and then explain why I think it matters. So, so continuous delivery is working so that our software is always in a releasable state. Continuous deployment is built on top of continuous delivery. And if all of your tests pass, you just push the change out automatically into production. And that's a really, really good thing. If you can get, if you can get to that point where you can release all of the time small changes, that's probably the best way of getting this, optimising to get this really fast feedback, all the way out to your end users. Now the problem is, is that there are some kinds of software where that doesn't make any sense. There are some kinds of software for a variety of different kinds of reasons, depending on the technology, the regulation, um, real practical limitations for some reason, why we can't do that. So, Tesla are a continuous delivery company. But part of what they are continuously, continuously delivering is software embodied as silicon burnt into devices in the car. There's physics involved in burning the silicon. So you can't always release every change immediately that the software is, the software is done. That's not practical. So you have to manage that slightly differently. Uh, one of my clients, um, Siemens build medical devices and so, within the regulatory framework for medical devices that can kill people, you're not allowed to release them all of the time into production. And so, continuous delivery is the foundational idea but continuous deployment is kind of the, the limit, I suppose of where you can get to. If you're Amazon, continuous, continuous deployment makes a huge amount of sense. Amazon are pushing out changes. I think it's currently 1. 5 changes per second. It might be more than that. It might be five changes per second. Something like that. Something ridiculous like that. But that's what they're doing. And so they're able to move ridiculously fast and learn ridiculously quickly. And so build better software. I think you can think of it from a more internally focused viewpoint as that they each optimize for slightly different things.

Continuous delivery gives us feedback on whether we are, um, building things right and continuous deployment gives us feedback on whether we're building the right things. So we learn more about our product from continuous deployment by getting it into the hands of real users, monitoring that and understanding their impact. We get, and we can't get that kind of feedback any other way really than getting out to real users. We don't learn those lessons until real users are really using it. Continuous delivery though, gives us feedback on, does this do what we think it's doing? Um, is it good quality? Is it fast enough? Is it resilient enough? All of those kinds of things. We can measure those things. And we can know those before we release. So, they are slightly different things. And they do, they do balance off in different ways. They give us different levels of value. There's an excellent book that's recently been released on continuous deployment. Um, I've forgotten the name of the author. Valentina, somebody, I think. Um, but I wrote the foreword, so I should remember the name of the author. I'm very embarrassed, but it's, it's, it's a really good book, and it goes into lots of detail about continuous deployment as distinct from continuous delivery. I think, but I suppose I would say this, wouldn't I? I think that continuous delivery is the more foundational practice here, and I think that depending on your viewpoint, I think this is one of the very, very few ideas where, where Jez Humble and I would, would come at this from slightly different perspectives. I tended, I've tended to spend the latter part of my career working in environments where continuous deployment wasn't practical. I couldn't, I was never going to get my clients to, to, to do it in, in, in the environments in which they were building things. And sometimes they couldn't even if they wanted to. Um, I think Jez has worked in environments where continuous deployment was a little easier. And so that seems more natural. And so I think that kind of is why, um, some of the DORA metrics, for example, measure the efficiency based on assumptions, really, of continuous deployment.

Um, so I think, I think continuous deployment is the right target to aim for. You want to be able to release as frequently as is practicable, given the constraints on you, and you want to kind of push at the boundaries of those constraints where you can. So, for example, working with Siemens, we weren't allowed to release software into production of medical systems in clinical settings, but we could release much more frequently to non-clinical settings. So we did that, so we identified some non-clinical settings, and we released frequently to those places, in university hospitals, for example, and so on.

Kovid Batra: So I think it's almost time. Uh, and, uh, we do have more questions, but just because the stream is for an hour, uh, it's going to end. So we'll take those questions offline. Uh, I'll email the answers to you. Uh, audience, please don't be disappointed here. It's just in the interest of time that we'll have to stop here. Thank you so much, Dave, Denis, for this amazing, amazing session. It was nice talking to you and learning so much about CD, TDD, engineering metrics from you. Thank you so much once again.

Dave Farley: It's a pleasure. Thank you. Bye-bye. Thanks everyone.

Denis Čahuk: Thanks!

Are you feeling unsure if your team is making real progress, even though you’re following DevOps practices? Maybe you’ve implemented tools and automation but still struggle to identify what’s working and what’s holding your projects back. You’re not alone. Many teams face similar frustrations when they can’t measure their success effectively.

‍

But here’s the truth: without clear metrics, it’s nearly impossible to know if your DevOps processes are driving the results you need. Tracking the right DevOps metrics can make all the difference, offering insights that help you streamline workflows, fix bottlenecks, and make data-driven decisions.

‍

In this blog, we’ll dive into the essential DevOps metrics that empower teams to confidently measure success. Whether you’re just getting started or looking to refine your approach, these metrics will give you the clarity you need to drive continuous improvement. Ready to take control of your project’s success? Let’s get started.

‍

What Are DevOps Metrics?

DevOps metrics are statistics and data points that correlate to a team's DevOps model's performance. They measure process efficiency and reveal areas of friction between the phases of the software delivery pipeline. 

‍

These metrics are essential for tracking progress toward achieving overarching goals set by the team. The primary purpose of DevOps metrics is to provide insight into technical capabilities, team processes, and overall organizational culture. 

‍

By quantifying performance, teams can identify bottlenecks, assess quality improvements, and measure application performance gains. Ultimately, if you don’t measure it, you can’t improve it.

Key Categories of DevOps Metrics

The DevOps Metrics has these primary categories: 

• Software Delivery Metrics: Measure the speed and efficiency of software delivery.
• Stability Metrics: Assess the reliability and quality of software in production.
• Operational Performance Metrics: Evaluate system performance under load.
• Security Metrics: Monitor vulnerabilities and compliance within the software development lifecycle.
• Cost Efficiency Metrics: Analyze resource utilization and cost-effectiveness in DevOps practices.

Understanding these categories helps organizations select relevant metrics tailored to their specific challenges.

Why Metrics Matter: Driving Measurable Success with DevOps

DevOps is often associated with automation and speed, but at its core, it is about achieving measurable success. Many teams struggle with measuring their success due to inconsistent performance or unclear goals. It's understandable to feel lost when confronted with vast amounts of data and competing priorities.

However, the right metrics can simplify this process. 

They help clarify what success looks like for your team and provide a framework for continuous improvement. Remember, you don't have to tackle everything at once; focusing on a few key metrics can lead to significant progress.

Key DevOps Metrics to Track for Success

To effectively measure your project's success, consider tracking the following essential DevOps metrics:

Deployment Frequency

This metric tracks how often your team releases new code. A higher frequency indicates a more agile development process. Deployment frequency is measured by dividing the number of deployments made during a given period by the total number of weeks/days. One deployment per week is standard, but it also depends on the type of product.

‍

For example, a team working on a mission-critical financial application may aim for daily deployments to fix bugs and ensure system stability quickly. In contrast, a team developing a mobile game might release updates weekly to coincide with the app store's review process.

Lead Time for Changes 

Measure how quickly changes move from development to production. Shorter lead times suggest a more efficient workflow. Lead time for changes is the length of time between when a code change is committed to the trunk branch and when it is in a deployable state, such as when code passes all necessary pre-release tests.

‍

Consider a scenario where a developer submits a bug fix to the main codebase. The change is automatically tested, approved, and deployed to production within an hour. This rapid turnaround allows the team to quickly address customer issues and maintain a high level of service.

Change Failure Rate

This assesses the percentage of changes that cause issues requiring a rollback. Lower rates indicate better quality control. The change failure rate is the percentage of code changes that require hot fixes or other remediation after production, excluding failures caught by testing and fixed before deployment.

Imagine a team that deploys 100 changes per month, with 10 of those changes requiring a rollback due to production issues. Their change failure rate would be 10%. By tracking this metric over time and implementing practices like thorough testing and canary deployments, they can work to reduce the failure rate and improve overall stability.

Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR)

Evaluate how quickly your team can recover from failures. A shorter recovery time reflects resilience and effective incident management. MTTR measures how long it takes to recover from a partial service interruption or total failure, regardless of whether the interruption is the result of a recent deployment or an isolated system failure.

In a scenario where a production server crashes due to a hardware failure, the team's MTTR is the time it takes to restore service. If they can bring the server back online and restore functionality within 30 minutes, that's a strong MTTR. Tracking this metric helps teams identify areas for improvement in their incident response processes and infrastructure resilience.

These metrics are not about achieving perfection; they are tools designed to help you focus on continuous improvement. High-performing teams typically measure lead times in hours, have change failure rates in the 0-15 percent range, can deploy changes on demand, and often do so many times a day.

Common Challenges When Measuring DevOps Success

While measuring success is essential, it's important to acknowledge the emotional and practical hurdles that come with it:

Resistance to change 

People often resist change, especially when it disrupts established routines or processes. Overcoming this resistance is crucial for fostering a culture of improvement.

For example, a team that has been manually deploying code for years may be hesitant to adopt an automated deployment pipeline. Addressing their concerns, providing training, and demonstrating the benefits can help ease the transition.

Lack of time

Teams frequently find themselves caught up in day-to-day demands, leaving little time for proactive improvement efforts. This can create a cycle where urgent tasks overshadow long-term goals.

A development team working on a tight deadline may struggle to find time to optimize their deployment process or write automated tests. Prioritizing these activities as part of the sprint planning process can help ensure they are not overlooked.

Complacency

Organizations may become complacent when things seem to be functioning adequately, preventing them from seeking further improvements. The danger lies in assuming that "good enough" will suffice without striving for excellence.

A team that has achieved a 95% test coverage rate may be tempted to focus on other priorities, even though further improvements could catch additional bugs and reduce technical debt. Regularly reviewing metrics and setting stretch goals can help avoid complacency.

Data overload

With numerous metrics available, teams might struggle to determine which ones are most relevant to their goals. This can lead to confusion and frustration rather than clarity.

A large organization with dozens of teams and applications may find itself drowning in DevOps metrics data. Focusing on a core set of key metrics that align with overall business objectives and tailoring dashboards for each team's specific needs can help manage this challenge.

Measuring success

Determining what success looks like and how to measure it in a continuous improvement culture can be challenging. Setting clear goals and KPIs is essential but often overlooked.

A team may struggle to define what "success" means for their project. Collaborating with stakeholders to establish measurable goals, such as reducing customer support tickets by 20% or increasing revenue by 5%, can provide a clear target to work towards.

If you're facing these challenges, remember that you are not alone. Start by identifying the most actionable metrics that resonate with your current goals. Focusing on a few key areas can make the process feel more manageable and less daunting.

How to Use DevOps Metrics for Continuous Improvement

Once you've identified the key metrics to track, it's time to leverage them for continuous improvement:

Establish baselines: Begin by establishing baseline measurements for each metric you plan to track. This will give you a reference point against which you can measure progress over time.

For example, if your current deployment frequency is once every two weeks, establish that as your baseline before setting a goal to deploy weekly within three months.

Set clear objectives: Define specific objectives for each metric based on your baseline measurements. For instance, if your current deployment frequency is once every two weeks, aim for weekly deployments within three months.

Implement feedback loops: Create mechanisms for gathering feedback from team members about processes and tools regularly used in development cycles. This could be through retrospectives or dedicated feedback sessions focusing on specific metrics.

After each deployment, hold a brief retrospective to discuss what went well, what could be improved, and any insights gained from the deployment metrics. Use this feedback to refine processes and inform future improvements.

Analyze trends: Regularly analyze trends in your metrics data rather than just looking at snapshots in time. For example, if you notice an increase in change failure rate over several weeks, investigate potential causes such as code complexity or inadequate testing practices.

Use tools like Typo to visualize trends in your DevOps metrics over time. Look for patterns and correlations that can help identify areas for improvement. For instance, if you notice that deployments with more than 50 commits tend to have higher failure rates, consider breaking changes into smaller batches.

Encourage experimentation: Foster an environment where team members feel comfortable experimenting with new processes or tools based on insights gained from metrics analysis. Encourage them to share their findings with others in the organization.

If a developer discovers a new testing framework that significantly reduces the time required to validate changes, support them in implementing it and sharing their experience with the broader team. Celebrating successful experiments helps reinforce a culture of continuous improvement.

Celebrate improvements: Recognize and celebrate improvements achieved through data-driven decision-making efforts—whether it's reducing MTTR or increasing deployment frequency—this reinforces positive behavior within teams.

When a team hits a key milestone, such as deploying 100 changes without a single failure, take time to acknowledge their achievement. Sharing success stories helps motivate teams and demonstrates the value of DevOps metrics.

Iterate regularly: Continuous improvement is not a one-time effort; it requires ongoing iteration based on what works best for your team's unique context and challenges encountered along the way.

As your team matures in its DevOps practices, regularly review and adjust your metrics strategy. What worked well in the early stages may need to evolve as your organization scales or faces new challenges. Remain flexible and open to experimenting with different approaches.

By following these steps consistently over time, you'll create an environment where continuous improvement becomes ingrained within your team's culture—ultimately leading toward greater efficiency and higher-quality outputs across all projects. 

Overcoming Obstacles with Typo: A Powerful DevOps Metrics Tracking Solution

One tool that can significantly ease the process of tracking DevOps metrics is Typo—a user-friendly platform designed specifically for streamlining metric collection while integrating seamlessly into existing workflows:

Key Features of Typo

Intuitive interface: Typo's user-friendly interface allows teams to easily monitor critical metrics such as deployment frequency and lead time for changes without extensive training or onboarding processes required beforehand.

For example, the Typo dashboard provides a clear view of key metrics like deployment frequency over time so teams can quickly see if they are meeting their goals or if adjustments are needed.

Automated data collection

By automating data collection processes through integrations with popular CI/CD tools like Jenkins or GitLab CI/CD pipelines—Typo eliminates manual reporting burdens placed upon developers—freeing them up so they can focus more on delivering value rather than managing spreadsheets!

Typo automatically gathers deployment data from your CI/CD tools so developers save time while reducing human error risk associated with manual data entry—allowing them instead to concentrate solely on improving results achieved through informed decision-making based upon actionable insights derived directly from their own data!

Real-time performance dashboards

Typo provides real-time performance dashboards that visualize key metrics at a glance, enabling quick decision-making based on current performance trends rather than relying solely upon historical data points!

The Typo dashboard updates in real time as new deployments occur, giving teams an immediate view of their current performance against goals. This allows them to quickly identify and address any issues arising. 

Customizable alerts & notifications

With customizable alerts set up around specific thresholds (e.g., if the change failure rate exceeds 10%), teams receive timely notifications that prompt them to take action before issues escalate further down production lines!

Typo allows teams to set custom alerts based on specific goals and thresholds—for example, receiving notification if the change failure rate rises above 5% over three consecutive deployments, helping catch potential issues early before they cause major problems. 

Integration capabilities

Typo effortlessly integrates with various project management tools (like Jira) alongside monitoring solutions (such as Datadog), providing comprehensive insights into both development processes and operational performance simultaneously.

Using Typo empowers organizations simplifying metric tracking without overwhelming users allowing them instead concentrate solely upon improving results achieved through informed decision-making based upon actionable insights derived directly from their own data. 

Embracing the DevOps Metrics Journey

As we conclude this discussion, measuring project success, effective DevOps metrics serve invaluable strategies driving continuous improvement initiatives while enhancing collaboration efforts among various stakeholders involved throughout every stage—from development through deployment until final delivery. By focusing specifically on key indicators like deployment frequency alongside lead time changes coupled together alongside change failure rates mean time recovery—you'll gain deeper insights into identifying bottlenecks while optimizing workflows accordingly. 

While challenges may arise along this journey towards achieving excellence within software delivery processes—tools like Typo combined alongside supportive cultures fostered throughout organizations will help navigate these obstacles successfully unlocking full potential inherent within each team member involved. 

So take those first steps today! 

Start tracking relevant metrics now—watch closely improvements unfold before eyes transforming not only how projects executed but also elevating overall quality delivered across all products released moving forward. 

‍

Join for a demo with Typo to learn more. 

‍

“Why does it feel like no matter how hard we try, our software deployments are always delayed or riddled with issues?”

Many development teams ask this question as they face the ongoing challenges of delivering software quickly while maintaining quality. Constant bottlenecks, long lead times, and recurring production failures can make it seem like smooth, efficient releases are out of reach.

But there’s a way forward: DORA Metrics. 

By focusing on these key metrics, teams can gain clarity on where their processes are breaking down and make meaningful improvements. With tools like Typo, you can simplify tracking and start taking real, actionable steps toward faster, more reliable software delivery. Let’s explore how DORA Metrics can help you transform your process.

What are DORA Metrics?

DORA Metrics consist of four key indicators that help teams assess their software delivery performance:

• Deployment Frequency: This metric measures how often new releases are deployed to production. High deployment frequency indicates a responsive and agile development process.

• Lead time for Changes: This tracks the time it takes for a code change to go from commit to deployment. Short lead times reflect an efficient workflow and the ability to respond quickly to user feedback.

• Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR): This indicates how quickly a team can recover from a failure in production. A lower MTTR signifies strong incident management practices and resilience in the face of challenges.

• Change Failure Rate: This measures the percentage of deployments that result in failures, such as system outages or degraded performance. A lower change failure rate indicates higher quality releases and effective testing processes.

These metrics are essential for teams striving to deliver high-quality software efficiently and can significantly impact overall performance.

Challenges teams commonly face

While DORA Metrics provide valuable insights, teams often encounter several common challenges:

• Data overload and complexity: Tracking too many metrics can lead to confusion and overwhelm, making it difficult to identify key areas for improvement. Teams may find themselves lost in data without clear direction.

• Misaligned priorities: Different teams may have conflicting goals, making it challenging to work towards shared objectives. Without alignment, efforts can become fragmented, leading to inefficiencies.

• Fear of failure: A culture that penalizes mistakes can hinder innovation and slow down progress. Teams may become risk-averse, avoiding necessary changes that could enhance their delivery processes.

Breaking down the 4 DORA Metrics

Understanding each DORA Metric in depth is crucial for improving software delivery performance. Let's dive deeper into what each metric measures and why it's important:

Deployment Frequency

Deployment frequency measures how often an organization successfully releases code to production. This metric is an indicator of overall DevOps efficiency and the speed of the development team. Higher deployment frequency suggests a more agile and responsive delivery process.

To calculate deployment frequency:

• Track the number of successful deployments to production per day, week, or month.
• Determine the median number of days per week with at least one successful deployment.
• If the median is 3 or more days per week, it falls into the "Daily" deployment frequency bucket.
• If the median is less than 3 days per week but the team deploys most weeks, it's considered "Weekly" frequency.
• Monthly or lower frequency is considered "Monthly" or "Yearly" respectively.

The definition of a "successful" deployment depends on your team's requirements. It could be any deployment to production or only those that reach a certain traffic percentage. Adjust this threshold based on your business needs.

Read more: Learn How Requestly Improved their Deployment Frequency by 30%

Lead Time for Changes

Lead time for changes measures the amount of time it takes a code commit to reach production. This metric reflects the efficiency and complexity of the delivery pipeline. Shorter lead times indicate an optimized workflow and the ability to respond quickly to user feedback.

To calculate lead time for changes:

• Maintain a list of all changes included in each deployment, mapping each change back to the original commit SHA.
• Join this list with the changes table to get the commit timestamp.
• Calculate the time difference between when the commit occurred and when it was deployed.
• Use the median time across all deployments as the lead time metric.

Lead time for Changes is a key indicator of how quickly your team can deliver value to customers. Reducing the amount of work in each deployment, improving code reviews, and increasing automation can help shorten lead times.

Change Failure Rate (CFR)

Change failure rate measures the percentage of deployments that result in failures requiring a rollback, fix, or incident. This metric is an important indicator of delivery quality and reliability. A lower change failure rate suggests more robust testing practices and a stable production environment.

To calculate change failure rate:

• Track the total number of deployments attempted.
• Count the number of those deployments that caused a failure or needed to be rolled back.
• Divide the number of failed deployments by the total to get the percentage.

Change failure rate is a counterbalance to deployment frequency and lead time. While those metrics focus on speed, change failure rate ensures that rapid delivery doesn't come at the expense of quality. Reducing batch sizes and improving testing can lower this rate.

Mean Time to Recovery (MTTR)

Mean time to recovery measures how long it takes to recover from a failure or incident in production. This metric indicates a team's ability to respond to issues and minimize downtime. A lower MTTR suggests strong incident management practices and resilience.

To calculate MTTR:

• For each incident, note when it was opened.
• Track when a deployment occurred that resolved the incident.
• Calculate the time difference between incident creation and resolution.
• Use the median time across all incidents as your MTTR metric.

Restoring service quickly is critical for maintaining customer trust and satisfaction. Improving monitoring, automating rollbacks, and having clear runbooks can help teams recover faster from failures.

By understanding these metrics in depth and tracking them over time, teams can identify areas for improvement and measure the impact of changes to their delivery processes. Focusing on these right metrics helps optimize for both speed and stability in software delivery.

‍

If you are looking to implement DORA Metrics in your team, download the guide curated by DORA experts at Typo.

‍

How to start using DORA Metrics effectively

Starting with DORA Metrics can feel daunting, but here are some practical steps you can take:

Step 1: Identify your goals

Begin by clarifying what you want to achieve with DORA Metrics. Are you looking to improve deployment frequency? Reduce lead time? Understanding your primary objectives will help you focus your efforts effectively.

Step 2: Choose one metric

Select one metric that aligns most closely with your current goals or pain points. For instance:

• If your team struggles with frequent outages, focus on reducing the Change Failure Rate.
• If you need faster releases, prioritize Deployment Frequency.

Step 3: Establish baselines

Before implementing changes, gather baseline data for your chosen metric over a set period (e.g., last month). This will help you understand your starting point and measure progress accurately.

Step 4: Implement changes gradually

Make small adjustments based on insights from your baseline data. For example:

If focusing on Deployment Frequency, consider adopting continuous integration practices or automating parts of your deployment process.

Step 5: Monitor progress regularly

Use tools like Typo to track your chosen metric consistently. Set up regular check-ins (weekly or bi-weekly) to review progress against your baseline data and adjust strategies as needed.

Step 6: Iterate based on feedback

Encourage team members to share their experiences with implemented changes regularly. Gather feedback continuously and be open to iterating on your processes based on what works best for your team.

How Typo helps with DORA Metrics 

Typo simplifies tracking and optimizing DORA Metrics through its user-friendly features:

• Intuitive dashboards: Typo's dashboards allow teams to visualize their chosen metric clearly, making it easy to monitor progress at a glance while customizing views based on specific needs or roles within the team.

• Focused tracking: By enabling teams to concentrate on one metric at a time, Typo reduces information overload. This focused approach helps ensure that improvements are actionable and manageable.

• Automated reporting: Typo automates data collection and reporting processes, saving time while reducing errors associated with manual tracking so you receive regular updates without extensive administrative overhead.

• Actionable insights: The platform provides insights into bottlenecks or areas needing improvement based on real-time data analysis; if cycle time increase, Typo highlights specific stages in your deployment pipeline requiring attention.

‍

‍

‍

By leveraging Typo's capabilities, teams can effectively reduce lead times, enhance deployment processes, and foster a culture of continuous improvement without feeling overwhelmed by data complexity.

“When I was looking for an Engineering KPI platform, Typo was the only one with an amazing tailored proposal that fits with my needs. Their dashboard is very organized and has a good user experience, it has been months of use with good experience and really good support” 

- Rafael Negherbon, Co-founder & CTO @ Transfeera

Read more: Learn How Transfeera reduced Review Wait Time by 70%

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid them

When implementing DORA Metrics, teams often encounter several pitfalls that can hinder progress:

Over-focusing on one metric: While it's essential prioritize certain metrics based on team goals, overemphasizing one at others' expense can lead unbalanced improvements; ensure all four metrics are considered strategy holistic view performance.

Ignoring contextual factors: Failing consider external factors (like market changes organizational shifts) when analyzing metrics can lead astray; always contextualize data broader business objectives industry trends meaningful insights.

Neglecting team dynamics: Focusing solely metrics without considering team dynamics create toxic environment where individuals feel pressured numbers rather than encouraged collaboration; foster open communication within about successes challenges promoting culture learning from failures.

Setting unrealistic targets: Establishing overly ambitious targets frustrate team members if they feel these goals unattainable reasonable timeframes; set realistic targets based historical performance data while encouraging gradual improvement over time.

Key Approaches to Implementing DORA Metrics

When implementing DORA (DevOps Research and Assessment) metrics, it is crucial to adhere to best practices to ensure accurate measurement of key performance indicators and successful evaluation of your organization's DevOps practices. By following established guidelines for DORA metrics implementation, teams can effectively track their progress, identify areas for improvement, and drive meaningful changes to enhance their DevOps capabilities.

Customize DORA metrics to fit your team's needs

Every team operates with its own unique processes and goals. To maximize the effectiveness of DORA metrics, consider the following steps:

• Identify relevant metrics: Determine which metrics align best with your team's current challenges and objectives.
• Adjust targets: Use historical data and industry benchmarks to set realistic targets that reflect your team's context.

By customizing these metrics, you ensure they provide meaningful insights that drive improvements tailored to your specific needs.

Foster leadership support for DORA metrics

Leadership plays a vital role in cultivating a culture of continuous improvement. To effectively support DORA metrics, leaders should:

• Encourage transparency: Promote open sharing of metrics and progress among all team members to foster accountability.
• Provide resources: Offer training and resources that focus on best practices for implementing DORA metrics.

By actively engaging with their teams about these metrics, leaders can create an environment where everyone feels empowered to contribute toward collective goals.

Track progress and celebrate wins

Regularly monitoring progress using DORA metrics is essential for sustained improvement. Consider the following practices:

• Schedule regular check-ins: Hold retrospectives focused on evaluating progress and discussing challenges.
• Celebrate achievements: Take the time to recognize both small and significant successes. Celebrating wins boosts morale and motivates the team to continue striving for improvement.

Recognizing achievements reinforces positive behaviours and encourages ongoing commitment, ultimately enhancing software delivery practices.

Empowering Teams with DORA Metrics

DORA Metrics offer valuable insights into how to transform software delivery processes, enhance collaboration, and improve quality; understanding these deeply and implementing them thoughtfully within an organization positions it for success in delivering high-quality efficiently.

Start small manageable changes—focus one metric at time—leverage tools like Typo support journey better performance; remember every step forward counts creating more effective development environment where continuous improvement thrives!

‍

Imagine you are on a solo road trip with a set destination. You constantly check your map and fuel gauge to check whether you are on a track. Now, replace the road trip with an agile project and the map with a burndown chart. 

Just like a map guides your journey, a burndown chart provides a clear picture of how much work has been completed and what remains. 

What is the Burndown Chart? 

Burndown charts are visual representations of the team’s progress used for agile project management. They are useful for scrum teams and agile project managers to assess whether the project is on track.

Burndown charts are generally of three types:

Product Burndown Chart

The product burndown chart focuses on the big picture and visualizes the entire project. It determines how many product goals the development team has achieved so far and the remaining work.

Sprint Burndown Chart

Sprint burndown charts focus on the ongoing sprints. It indicates progress towards completing the sprint backlog.

Epic Burndown Chart

This chart focuses on how your team performs against the work in the epic over time. It helps to track the advancement of major deliverables within a project.

How Does a Burndown Chart Work? 

A burndown chart shows the amount of work remaining (on the vertical axis) against time (on the horizontal axis). It includes an ideal work completion line and the actual work progress line. As tasks are completed, the actual line "burns down" toward zero. This allows teams to identify if they are on track to complete their goals within the set timeline and spot deviations early.

Purpose of the burndown chart 

A burndown chart is a visual tool used by agile teams to track progress. Here is a breakdown of its key functions: 

Identify Issues Early 

Burndown charts allow agile teams to visualize the remaining work against time which helps to spot issues early from the expected progress. They can identify bottlenecks or obstacles early which enables them to proactive problem-solving before the issue escalates. 

Visualize Sprint Progress

The clear graphical representation of work completed versus work remaining makes it easy for teams to see how much they have accomplished and how much is left to do within a sprint. This visualization helps maintain focus and alignment among team members. 

Boost Team Morale 

The chart enables the team to see their tangible progress which significantly boosts their morale. As they observe the line trending downward, indicating completed tasks, it fosters a sense of achievement and motivates them to continue performing well.

Improve Estimation

After each sprint, teams can analyze the burndown chart to evaluate their estimation accuracy regarding task completion times. This retrospective analysis helps refine future estimates and improves planning for upcoming sprints. 

Burndown Chart vs. Burnup Chart

‍

How to create a burndown chart in Excel? 

Step 1: Create Your Table

Open a new sheet in Excel and create a new table that includes 3 columns.

The first column should include the dates of each sprint, the second column have the ideal burndown i.e. ideal rate at which work will be completed and the last column should have the actual burndown i.e. updating them as story points get completed.

Step 2: Add Data in these Columns

Now, fill in the data accordingly. This includes the dates of your sprints and numbers in the Ideal Burndown column indicating the desired number of tasks remaining after each day throughout the let’s say, 10-day sprint.

As you complete tasks each day, update the spreadsheet to document the number of tasks you can finish under the ‘Actual Burndown’ column.

‍

Step 3: Create a Burndown Chart

Now, it’s time to convert the data into a graph. To create a chart, follow these steps: Select the three columns > Click ‘Insert’ on the menu bar > Select the ‘Line chart’ icon, and generate a line graph to visualize the different data points you have in your chart.

‍

Limitations of Burndown Chart 

One-Dimensional View

A Burndown chart mainly tracks the amount of work remaining, measured in story points or hours. This one-dimensional view does not offer insights into the complexity or nature of the tasks, hence, oversimplifying project progress. 

Unable to Detect Quality Issues or Technical Debt

Burndown charts fail to account for quality issues or the accommodation of technical debt. Agile teams might complete tasks on time but compromise on quality. This further leads to long-term challenges that remain invisible in the chart.

Lack of Visibility into Team Dynamics

The burndown chart does not capture team dynamics or collaboration patterns. It fails to show how team members are working together, which is vital for understanding productivity and identifying areas for improvement.

Mask Underlying Problems

The problems might go unnoticed related to story estimation and sprint planning. When a team consistently underestimates tasks, the chart may still show a downward trend. This masks deeper issues that need to be addressed.

Changes in Work Scope

Another disadvantage of burndown charts is that they do not reflect changes in scope or interruptions that occur during a sprint. If new tasks are added or priorities shift, the chart may give a misleading impression of progress.

Unable to Show Work Distribution and Bottlenecks

The chart does not provide insights into how work is distributed among team members or highlight bottlenecks in the workflow. This lack of detail can hinder efforts to optimize team performance and resource allocation.

What Key Components Are Missing in Burndown Charts for a Complete View of Sprints?

Burndown charts are great tools for tracking progress in a sprint. However, they don’t provide a full picture of sprint performance as they lack the following dimensions: 

Real-time Sprint Monitoring Metrics

Velocity Stability Indicators 

• Sprint velocity variance: It tracks the difference between planned and actual sprint velocities to assess predictability.
• Story completion rate by size category: It evaluates the team's ability to complete stories of varying complexities.
• Average time in each status: It highlights bottlenecks by analyzing how long stories stay in each stage (To Do, In Progress, etc.).
• Number of stories carried over: It measures unfinished work moved to the next sprint, which impacts planning accuracy.
• Scope change percentage: It reflects how much the sprint backlog changes during execution

Quality Metrics

• Code review coverage and throughput: It highlights the extent and speed of code reviews to ensure quality.
• Unit test coverage trends: It measures improvements or regressions in unit test coverage over time.
• Number of bugs found: It monitors the quality of sprint deliverables.
• Technical debt items identified: It evaluates areas where shortcuts may have introduced long-term risks.
• Build and deployment success rate: It highlights stability in CI/CD processes.
• Production incidents related to sprint work: It connects sprint output to real-world impact.

Team Collaboration Indicators

• Code review response time: It measures how quickly team members review code, impacting workflow speed.
• Pair programming hours: It reflects collaborative coding time, boosting knowledge transfer and quality.
• Knowledge-sharing sessions: This indicates team growth through discussions or sessions.
• Cross-functional collaboration: It highlights collaboration across different roles, like devs and designers.
• Blockers resolution time: It monitors how quickly obstacles are removed.
• Team capacity utilization: It analyzes whether team capacity is effectively utilized.

Work Distribution Analysis

• Task distribution across team members: It checks for workload balance.
• Skill coverage matrix: It monitors whether all necessary skills are represented in the sprint.
• Dependencies resolved: It highlights dependency identification and resolution.
• Context switching frequency: It analyzes task switching, which can impact productivity.
• Planned vs unplanned work ratio: It evaluates how much work was planned versus ad-hoc tasks.

Sprint Retrospective Analysis

Quantitative Measures

Sprint Goals Achievement

• Completed story points vs committed: It evaluates sprint completion success.
• Critical features delivered: It monitors feature delivery against sprint goals.
• Technical debt addressed: It tracks progress on resolving legacy issues.
• Quality metrics achieved: It ensures deliverables meet quality standards.

Process Efficiency

• Lead time for user stories: Time taken from story creation to completion.
• Cycle time analysis: It tracks how long it takes to move work items through the sprint.
• Sprint predictability index: It compares planned vs actual progress consistency.
• Planning accuracy percentage: It monitors how well the team plans tasks.

Team Performance

• Team happiness index: It gauges morale.
• Innovation time percentage: It monitors time spent on creative or experimental work.
• Learning goals achieved: It tracks growth opportunities taken.
• Cross-skilling progress: It measures skill development.

Qualitative Measures

Sprint Planning Effectiveness

• Story refinement quality: It assesses the readiness and clarity of backlog items.
• Estimation accuracy: It monitors the accuracy of time/effort estimates.
• Dependencies identification: It indicates how well dependencies were spotted.
• Risk assessment adequacy: It ensures risks are anticipated and managed.

Team Dynamics

• Communication effectiveness: It ensures clarity and quality of team communication.
• Collaboration patterns: It highlights team interactions.
• Knowledge sharing: It checks for the effective transfer of knowledge.
• Decision-making efficiency: It gauges the timeliness and effectiveness of team decisions.

Continuous Improvement

• Action items completion rate: It measures follow-through on retrospective action items.
• Process improvement initiatives: It tracks changes implemented for efficiency.
• Tools and automation adoption: It monitors how well the team leverages technology.
• Team capability enhancement: It highlights skill and process improvements.

Typo - An Effective Sprint Analysis Tool

Typo’s sprint analysis feature allows engineering leaders to track and analyze their team’s progress throughout a sprint. It uses data from Git and the issue management tool to provide insights into getting insights on how much work has been completed, how much work is still in progress, and how much time is left in the sprint hence, identifying any potential problems early on and taking corrective action.

‍Key Features:

• A velocity chart shows how much work has been completed in previous sprints.

• A burndown chart to measure progress

• A sprint backlog that shows all of the work that needs to be completed in the sprint.

• A list of sprint issues that shows the status of each issue.

• Time tracking to See how long tasks are taking.

• Blockage tracking to check how often tasks are being blocked, and what the causes of those blocks are.

• Bottleneck identification to identify areas where work is slowing down.

• Historical data analysis to compare sprint data over time.

Conclusion 

Burndown charts offer a clear and concise visualization of progress over time. While they excel at tracking remaining work, they are not without limitations, especially when it comes to addressing quality, team dynamics, or changes in scope. 

Integrating advanced metrics and tools like Typo, teams can achieve a more holistic view of their sprint performance and ensure continuous improvement. 

‍

‍

‍

Your engineering team is the biggest asset of your organization. They work tirelessly on software projects, despite the tight deadlines. 

However, there could be times when bottlenecks arise unexpectedly, and you struggle to get a clear picture of how resources are being utilized. 

This is where an Engineering Management Platform (EMP) comes into play.

An EMP acts as a central hub for engineering teams. It transforms chaos into clarity by offering actionable insights and aligning engineering efforts with broader business goals.

In this blog, we’ll discuss the essentials of EMPs and how to choose the best one for your team.

What are Engineering Management Platforms? 

Engineering Management Platforms (EMPs) are comprehensive tools that enhance the visibility and efficiency of engineering teams. They serve as a bridge between engineering processes and project management, enabling teams to optimize workflows, track how they allocate their time and resources, track performance metrics, assess progress on key deliverables, and make informed decisions based on data-driven insights. This further helps in identifying bottlenecks, streamlining processes, and improving the developer experience (DX). 

Core Functionalities 

Actionable Insights 

One main functionality of EMP is transforming raw data into actionable insights. This is done by analyzing performance metrics to identify trends, inefficiencies, and potential bottlenecks in the software delivery process. 

Risk Management 

The Engineering Management Platform helps risk management by identifying potential vulnerabilities in the codebase, monitoring technical debt, and assessing the impact of changes in real time. 

Team Collaboration

These platforms foster collaboration between cross-functional teams (Developers, testers, product managers, etc). They can be integrated with team collaboration tools like Slack, JIRA, and MS Teams. It promotes knowledge sharing and reduces silos through shared insights and transparent reporting. 

Performance Management 

EMPs provide metrics to track performance against predefined benchmarks and allow organizations to assess development process effectiveness. By measuring KPIs, engineering leaders can identify areas of improvement and optimize workflows for better efficiency. 

Essential Elements of an Engineering Management Platform

Developer Experience 

Developer Experience refers to how easily developers can perform their tasks. When the right tools are available, the process is streamlined and DX leads to an increase in productivity and job satisfaction. 

Key aspects include: 

• Streamlined workflows such as seamless integration with IDEs, CI/CD pipelines, and VCS. 
• Metrics such as WIP and Merge Frequency to identify areas for improvement. 

Engineering Velocity 

Engineering Velocity can be defined as the team’s speed and efficiency during software delivery. To track it, the engineering leader must have a bird’s-eye view of the team’s performance and areas of bottlenecks. 

Key aspects include:

• Monitor DORA metrics to track the team’s performance 
• Provide resources and tools to track progress toward goals 

Business Alignment 

Engineering Management Software must align with broader business goals to help move in the right direction. This alignment is necessary for maximizing the impact of engineering work on organizational goals.

Key aspects include: 

• Track where engineering resources (Time and People) are being allocated. 
• Improved project forecasting and sprint planning to meet deadlines and commitments. 

Benefits of Engineering Management Platform 

Enhances Team Collaboration

The engineering management platform offers end-to-end visibility into developer workload, processes, and potential bottlenecks. It provides centralized tools for the software engineering team to communicate and coordinate seamlessly by integrating with platforms like Slack or MS Teams. It also allows engineering leaders and developers to have data-driven and sufficient context around 1:1. 

Increases Visibility 

Engineering software offers 360-degree visibility into engineering workflows to understand project statuses, deadlines, and risks for all stakeholders. This helps identify blockers and monitor progress in real-time. It also provides engineering managers with actionable data to guide and supervise engineering teams.

Facilitates Continuous Improvement 

EMPs allow developers to adapt quickly to changes based on project demands or market conditions. They foster post-mortems and continuous learning and enable team members to retrospectively learn from successes and failures. 

Improves Developer Well-being 

EMPs provide real-time visibility into developers' workloads that allow engineering managers to understand where team members' time is being invested. This allows them to know their developers’ schedule and maintain a flow state, hence, reducing developer burnout and workload management.

Fosters Data-driven Decision-Making 

Engineering project management software provides actionable insights into a team’s performance and complex engineering projects. It further allows the development team to prioritize tasks effectively and engage in strategic discussions with stakeholders. 

How to Choose an Engineering Management Platform for Your Team? 

Understanding Your Team’s Needs

The first and foremost point is to assess your team’s pain points. Identify the current challenges such as tracking progress, communication gaps, or workload management. Also, consider Team Size and Structure such as whether your team is small or large, distributed or co-located, as this will influence the type of platform you need.

Be clear about what you want the platform to achieve, for example: improving efficiency, streamlining processes, or enhancing collaboration.

Evaluate Key Categories

When choosing the right EMP for your team, consider assessing the following categories:

Processes and Team Health

A good EMP must evaluate how well the platform supports efficient workflows and provides a multidimensional picture of team health including team well-being, collaboration, and productivity.

User Experience and Customization 

The Engineering Management Platform must have an intuitive and user-friendly interface for both tech and non-tech users. It should also include customization of dashboards, repositories, and metrics that cater to specific needs and workflow. 

Allocation and Business Value 

The right platform helps in assessing resource allocation across various projects and tasks such as time spent on different activities, identifying over or under-utilization of resources, and quantifying the value delivered by the engineering team. 

Integration Capabilities 

Strong integrations centralize the workflow, reduce fragmentation, and improve efficiency. These platforms must integrate seamlessly with existing tools, such as project management software, communication platforms, and CRMs.

Customer Support 

The platform must offer reliable customer support through multiple channels such as chat, email, or phone. You can also take note of extensive self-help resources like FAQs, tutorials, and forums.

Research and Compare Options 

Research various EMPs available in the market. Now based on your key needs, narrow down platforms that fit your requirements. Use resources like reviews, comparisons, and recommendations from industry peers to understand real-world experiences. You can also schedule demos with shortlisted providers to know the features and usability in detail. 

Conduct a Trial Run

Opt for a free trial or pilot phase to test the platform with a small group of users to get a hands-on feel. Afterward, Gather feedback from your team to evaluate how well the tool fits into their workflows.

Select your Best Fit 

Finally, choose the EMP that best meets your requirements based on the above-mentioned categories and feedback provided by the team members. 

Typo: An Engineering Management Platform 

Typo is an effective engineering management platform that offers SDLC visibility, developer insights, and workflow automation to build better programs faster. It can seamlessly integrate into tech tool stacks such as GIT versioning, issue tracker, and CI/CD tools.

‍

It also offers comprehensive insights into the deployment process through key metrics such as change failure rate, time to build, and deployment frequency. Moreover, its automated code tool helps identify issues in the code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master.

‍

Typo has an effective sprint analysis feature that tracks and analyzes the team’s progress throughout a sprint. Besides this, It also provides 360 views of the developer experience i.e. captures qualitative insights and provides an in-depth view of the real issues.

‍

Conclusion

An Engineering Management Platform (EMP) not only streamlines workflow but transforms the way teams operate. These platforms foster collaboration, reduce bottlenecks, and provide real-time visibility into progress and performance. 

‍

Maintaining a balance between speed and code quality is a challenge for every developer. 

Deadlines and fast-paced projects often push teams to prioritize rapid delivery, leading to compromises in code quality that can have long-lasting consequences. While cutting corners might seem efficient in the moment, it often results in technical debt and a codebase that becomes increasingly difficult to manage.

The hidden costs of poor code quality are real, impacting everything from development cycles to team morale. This blog delves into the real impact of low code quality, its common causes, and actionable solutions tailored to developers looking to elevate their code standards.

Understanding the Core Elements of Code Quality

Code quality goes beyond writing functional code. High-quality code is characterized by readability, maintainability, scalability, and reliability. Ensuring these aspects helps the software evolve efficiently without causing long-term issues for developers. Let’s break down these core elements further:

• Readability: Code that follows consistent formatting, uses meaningful variable and function names, and includes clear inline documentation or comments. Readable code allows any developer to quickly understand its purpose and logic.

• Maintainability: Modular code that is organized with reusable functions and components. Maintainability ensures that code changes, whether for bug fixes or new features, don’t introduce cascading errors throughout the codebase.

• Scalability: Code designed withan architecture that supports growth. This involves using design patterns that decouple different parts of the code and make it easier to extend functionalities.

• Reliability: Robust code that has been tested under different scenarios to minimize bugs and unexpected behavior.

The Real Costs of Low Code Quality

Low code quality can significantly impact various facets of software development. Below are key issues developers face when working with substandard code:

Sluggish Development Cycles

Low-quality code often involves unclear logic and inconsistent practices, making it difficult for developers to trace bugs or implement new features. This can turn straightforward tasks into hours of frustrating work, delaying project milestones and adding stress to sprints.

Escalating Technical Debt

Technical debt accrues when suboptimal code is written to meet short-term goals. While it may offer an immediate solution, it complicates future updates. Developers need to spend significant time refactoring or rewriting code, which detracts from new development and wastes resources.

Bug-Prone Software

Substandard code tends to harbor hidden bugs that may not surface until they affect end-users. These bugs can be challenging to isolate and fix, leading to patchwork solutions that degrade the codebase further over time.

Collaboration Friction

When multiple developers contribute to a project, low code quality can cause misalignment and confusion. Developers might spend more time deciphering each other’s work than contributing to new development, leading to decreased team efficiency and a lower-quality product.

Scalability Bottlenecks

A codebase that doesn’t follow proper architectural principles will struggle when scaling. For instance, tightly coupled components make it hard to isolate and upgrade parts of the system, leading to performance issues and reduced flexibility.

Developer Burnout

Constantly working with poorly structured code is taxing. The mental effort needed to debug or refactor a convoluted codebase can demoralize even the most passionate developers, leading to frustration, reduced job satisfaction, and burnout.

Root Causes of Low Code Quality

Understanding the reasons behind low code quality helps in developing practical solutions. Here are some of the main causes:

Pressure to Deliver Rapidly

Tight project deadlines often push developers to prioritize quick delivery over thorough, well-thought-out code. While this may solve immediate business needs, it sacrifices code quality and introduces problems that require significant time and resources to fix later.

Lack of Unified Coding Standards

Without established coding standards, developers may approach problems in inconsistent ways. This lack of uniformity leads to a codebase that’s difficult to maintain, read, and extend. Coding standards help enforce best practices and maintain consistent formatting and documentation.

Insufficient Code Reviews

Skipping code reviews means missing opportunities to catch errors, bad practices, or code smells before they enter the main codebase. Peer reviews help maintain quality, share knowledge, and align the team on best practices.

Limited Testing Strategies

A codebase without sufficient testing coverage is bound to have undetected errors. Tests, especially automated ones, help identify issues early and ensure that any code changes do not break existing features.

Overreliance on Low-Code/No-Code Solutions

Low-code platforms offer rapid development but often generate code that isn’t optimized for long-term use. This code can be bloated, inefficient, and difficult to debug or extend, causing problems when the project scales or requires custom functionality.

Comprehensive Solutions to Improve Code Quality

Addressing low code quality requires deliberate, consistent effort. Here are expanded solutions with practical tips to help developers maintain and improve code standards:

Adopt Rigorous Code Reviews

Code reviews should be an integral part of the development process. They serve as a quality checkpoint to catch issues such as inefficient algorithms, missing documentation, or security vulnerabilities. To make code reviews effective:

• Create a structured code review checklist that focuses on readability, adherence to coding standards, potential performance issues, and proper error handling.

• Foster a culture where code reviews are seen as collaborative learning opportunities rather than criticism.

• Implement tools like GitHub’s review features or Bitbucket for in-depth code discussions.
  
  

Integrate Linters and Static Analysis Tools

Linters help maintain consistent formatting and detect common errors automatically. Tools like ESLint (JavaScript), RuboCop (Ruby), and Pylint (Python) check your code for syntax issues and adherence to coding standards. Static analysis tools go a step further by analyzing code for complex logic, performance issues, and potential vulnerabilities. To optimize their use:

• Configure these tools to align with your project’s coding standards.

• Run these tools in pre-commit hooks with Husky or integrate them into your CI/CD pipelines to ensure code quality checks are performed automatically.
  
  

Prioritize Comprehensive Testing

Adopt a multi-layered testing strategy to ensure that code is reliable and bug-free:

• Unit Tests: Write unit tests for individual functions or methods to verify they work as expected. Frameworks like Jest for JavaScript, PyTest for Python, and JUnit for Java are popular choices.

• Integration Tests: Ensure that different parts of your application work together smoothly. Tools like Cypress and Selenium can help automate these tests.
  ‍
• End-to-End Tests: Simulate real user interactions to catch potential issues that unit and integration tests might miss.

• Integrate testing into your CI/CD pipeline so that tests run automatically on every code push or pull request.
  
  

Dedicate Time for Refactoring

Refactoring helps improve code structure without changing its behavior. Regularly refactoring prevents code rot and keeps the codebase maintainable. Practical strategies include:

• Identify “code smells” such as duplicated code, overly complex functions, or tightly coupled modules.

• Apply design patterns where appropriate, such as Factory or Observer, to simplify complex logic.

• Use IDE refactoring tools like IntelliJ IDEA’s refactor feature or Visual Studio Code extensions to speed up the process.
  
  

Create and Enforce Coding Standards

Having a shared set of coding standards ensures that everyone on the team writes code with consistent formatting and practices. To create effective standards:

• Collaborate with the team to create a coding guideline that includes best practices, naming conventions, and common pitfalls to avoid.

• Document the guideline in a format accessible to all team members, such as a README file or a Confluence page.

• Conduct periodic training sessions to reinforce these standards.
  
  

Leverage Typo for Enhanced Code Quality

Typo can be a game-changer for teams looking to automate code quality checks and streamline reviews. It offers a range of features:

• Automated Code Review: Detects common issues, code smells, and inconsistencies, supplementing manual code reviews.

• Detailed Reports: Provides actionable insights, allowing developers to understand code weaknesses and focus on the most critical issues.

• Seamless Collaboration: Enables teams to leave comments and feedback directly on code, enhancing peer review discussions and improving code knowledge sharing.

• Continuous Monitoring: Tracks changes in code quality over time, helping teams spot regressions early and maintain consistent standards.

Enhance Knowledge Sharing and Training

Keeping the team informed on best practices and industry trends strengthens overall code quality. To foster continuous learning:

• Organize workshops, code review sessions, and tech talks where team members share insights or recent challenges they overcame.

• Encourage developers to participate in webinars, online courses, and conferences.

• Create a mentorship program where senior developers guide junior members through complex code and teach them best practices.
  

Strategically Use Low-Code Tools

Low-code tools should be leveraged for non-critical components or rapid prototyping, but ensure that the code generated is thoroughly reviewed and optimized. For more complex or business-critical parts of a project:

• Supplement low-code solutions with custom coding to improve performance and maintainability.

• Regularly review and refactor code generated by these platforms to align with project standards.

Commit to Continuous Improvement

Improving code quality is a continuous process that requires commitment, collaboration, and the right tools. Developers should assess current practices, adopt new ones gradually, and leverage automated tools like Typo to streamline quality checks. 

By incorporating these strategies, teams can create a strong foundation for building maintainable, scalable, and high-quality software. Investing in code quality now paves the way for sustainable development, better project outcomes, and a healthier, more productive team.

Sign up for a quick demo with Typo to learn more!

‍

Introduction

In today's fast-paced and rapidly evolving software development landscape, effective project management is crucial for engineering teams striving to meet deadlines, deliver quality products, and maintain customer satisfaction. Project management not only ensures that tasks are completed on time but also optimizes resource allocation enhances team collaboration, and improves communication across all stakeholders. A key tool that has gained prominence in this domain is JIRA, which is widely recognized for its robust features tailored for agile project management.

However, while JIRA offers numerous advantages, such as customizable workflows, detailed reporting, and integration capabilities with other tools, it also comes with limitations that can hinder its effectiveness. For instance, teams relying solely on JIRA dashboard gadget may find themselves missing critical contextual data from the development process. They may obtain a snapshot of project statuses but fail to appreciate the underlying issues impacting progress. Understanding both the strengths and weaknesses of JIRA dashboard gadget is vital for engineering managers to make informed decisions about their project management strategies.

The Limitations of JIRA Dashboard Gadgets

Lack of Contextual Data

JIRA dashboard gadgets primarily focus on issue tracking and project management, often missing critical contextual data from the development process. While JIRA can show the status of tasks and issues, it does not provide insights into the actual code changes, commits, or branch activities that contribute to those tasks. This lack of context can lead to misunderstandings about project progress and team performance. For example, a task may be marked as "in progress," but without visibility into the associated Git commits, managers may not know if the team is encountering blockers or if significant progress has been made. This disconnect can result in misaligned expectations and hinder effective decision-making.

Static Information

JIRA dashboards having road map gadget or sprint burndown gadget can sometimes present a static view of project progress, which may not reflect real-time changes in the development process. For instance, while a JIRA road map gadget or sprint burndown gadget may indicate that a task is "done," it does not account for any recent changes or updates made in the codebase. This static nature can hinder proactive decision-making, as managers may not have access to the most current information about the project's health. Additionally, relying on historical data can create a lag in response to emerging issues in issue statistics gadget. In a rapidly changing development environment, the ability to react quickly to new information is crucial for maintaining project momentum hence we need to move beyond default chart gadget like road map gadget or burndown chart gadget.

Limited Collaboration Insights

Collaboration is essential in software development, yet JIRA dashboards often do not capture the collaborative efforts of the team. Metrics such as code reviews, pull requests, and team discussions are crucial for understanding how well the team is working together. Without this information, managers may overlook opportunities for improvement in team dynamics and communication. For example, if a team is actively engaged in code reviews but this activity is not reflected in JIRA gadgets or sprint burndown gadget, managers may mistakenly assume that collaboration is lacking. This oversight can lead to missed opportunities to foster a more cohesive team environment and improve overall productivity.

Overemphasis on Individual Metrics

JIRA dashboard or other copy dashboard can sometimes encourage a focus on individual performance metrics rather than team outcomes. This can foster an environment of unhealthy competition, where developers prioritize personal achievements over collaborative success. Such an approach can undermine team cohesion and lead to burnout. When individual metrics are emphasized, developers may feel pressured to complete tasks quickly, potentially sacrificing code quality and collaboration. This focus on personal performance can create a culture where teamwork and knowledge sharing are undervalued, ultimately hindering project success.

Inflexibility in Reporting

JIRA dashboard layout often rely on predefined metrics and reports, which may not align with the unique needs of every project or team. This inflexibility can result in a lack of relevant insights that are critical for effective project management. For example, a team working on a highly innovative project may require different metrics than a team maintaining legacy software. The inability to customize reports can lead to frustration and a sense of disconnect from the data being presented.

The Power of Integrating Git Data with JIRA

Integrating Git data with JIRA provides a more holistic view of project performance and developer productivity. Here’s how this integration can enhance insights:

Real-Time Visibility into Development Activity

By connecting Git repositories with JIRA, engineering managers can gain real-time visibility into commits, branches, and pull requests associated with JIRA issues & issue statistics. This integration allows teams to see the actual development work being done, providing context to the status of tasks on the JIRA dashboard gadet. For instance, if a developer submits a pull request that relates to a specific JIRA ticket, the project manager instantly knows that work is ongoing, fostering transparency. Additionally, automated notifications for changes in the codebase linked to JIRA issues keep everyone updated without having to dig through multiple tools. This integrated approach ensures that management has a clear understanding of actual progress rather than relying on static task statuses.

Enhanced Collaboration and Communication

Integrating Git data with JIRA facilitates better collaboration among team members. Developers can reference JIRA issues in their commit messages, making it easier for the team to track changes related to specific tasks. This transparency fosters a culture of collaboration, as everyone can see how their work contributes to the overall project goals. Moreover, by having a clear link between code changes and JIRA issues, team members can engage in more meaningful discussions during stand-ups and retrospectives. This enhanced communication can lead to improved problem-solving and a stronger sense of shared ownership over the project.

Improved Risk Management

With integrated Git and JIRA data, engineering managers can identify potential risks more effectively. By monitoring commit activity and pull requests alongside JIRA issue statuses, managers can spot trends and anomalies that may indicate project delays or technical challenges. For example, if there is a sudden decrease in commit activity for a specific task, it may signal that the team is facing challenges or blockers. This proactive approach allows teams to address issues before they escalate, ultimately improving project outcomes and reducing the likelihood of last-minute crises.

Comprehensive Reporting and Analytics

The combination of JIRA and Git data enables more comprehensive reporting and analytics. Engineering managers can analyze not only task completion rates but also the underlying development activity that drives those metrics. This deeper understanding can inform better decision-making and strategic planning for future projects. For instance, by analyzing commit patterns and pull request activity, managers can identify trends in team performance and areas for improvement. This data-driven approach allows for more informed resource allocation and project planning, ultimately leading to more successful outcomes.

Best Practices for Integrating Git Data with JIRA

To maximize the benefits of integrating Git data with JIRA, engineering managers should consider the following best practices:

Select the Right Tools

Choose integration tools that fit your team's specific needs. Tools like Typo can facilitate the connection between Git and JIRA smoothly. Additionally, JIRA integrates directly with several source control systems, allowing for automatic updates and real-time visibility.

‍

If you’re ready to enhance your project delivery speed and predictability, consider integrating Git data with your JIRA dashboards. Explore Typo! We can help you do this in a few clicks & make it one of your favorite dashboards.

Establish Commit Message Guidelines

Encourage your team to adopt consistent commit message guidelines. Including JIRA issue keys in commit messages will create a direct link between the code change and the JIRA issue. This practice not only enhances traceability but also aids in generating meaningful reports and insights. For example, a commit message like 'JIRA-123: Fixed the login issue' can help managers quickly identify relevant commits related to specific tasks.

Automate Workflows

Leverage automation features available in both JIRA and Git platforms to streamline the integration process. For instance, set up automated triggers that update JIRA issues based on events in Git, such as moving a JIRA issue to 'In Review' once a pull request is submitted in Git. This reduces manual updates and alleviates the administrative burden on the team.

Train Your Team

Providing adequate training to your team ensures everyone understands the integration process and how to effectively use both tools together. Conduct workshops or create user guides that outline the key benefits of integrating Git and JIRA, along with tips on how to leverage their combined functionalities for improved workflows.

Monitor and Adapt

Implement regular check-ins to assess the effectiveness of the integration. Gather feedback from team members on how well the integration is functioning and identify any pain points. This ongoing feedback loop allows you to make incremental improvements, ensuring the integration continues to meet the needs of the team.

Utilize Dashboards for Visualization

Create comprehensive dashboards that visually represent combined metrics from both Git and JIRA. Tools like JIRA dashboards, Confluence, or custom-built data visualization platforms can provide a clearer picture of project health. Metrics can include the number of active pull requests, average time in code review, or commit activity relevant to JIRA task completion.

Encourage Regular Code Reviews

With the changes being reflected in JIRA, create a culture around regular code reviews linked to specific JIRA tasks. This practice encourages collaboration among team members, ensures code quality, and keeps everyone aligned with project objectives. Regular code reviews also lead to knowledge sharing, which strengthens the team's overall skill set.

Case Study:

25% Improvement in Task Completion with Jira-Git Integration at Trackso

To illustrate the benefits of integrating Git data with JIRA, let’s consider a case study of a software development team at a company called Trackso.

Background

Trackso, a remote monitoring platform for Solar energy, was developing a new SaaS platform that consisted of a diverse team of developers, designers, and project managers. The team relied heavily on JIRA for tracking project statuses, but they found their productivity hampered by several issues:

• Tasks had vague statuses that did not reflect actual progress to project managers.
• Developers frequently worked in isolation without insight into each other's code contributions.
• They could not correlate project delays with specific code changes or reviews, leading to poor risk management.

Implementation of Git and JIRA Integration

In 2022, Trackso's engineering manager decided to integrate Git data with JIRA. They chose GitHub for version control, given its robust collaborative features. The team set up automatic links between their JIRA tickets and corresponding GitHub pull requests and standardized their commit messages to include JIRA issue keys.

Metrics of Improvement

After implementing the integration, Trackso experienced significant improvements within three months:

• Increased Collaboration: There was a 40% increase in code review participation as developers began referencing JIRA issues in their commits, facilitating clearer discussions during code reviews.

• Reduced Delivery Times: Average task completion times decreased by 25%, as developers could see almost immediately when tasks were being actively worked on or if blockers arose.

• Improved Risk Management: The team reduced project delays by 30% due to enhanced visibility. For example, the integration helped identify that a critical feature was lagging due to slow pull request reviews. This enabled team leads to improve their code review workflows.

• Boosted Developer Morale: Developer satisfaction surveys indicated that 85% of team member felt more engaged in their work due to improved communication and clarity around task statuses.

Challenges Faced

Despite these successes, Trackso faced challenges during the integration process:

• Initial Resistance: Some team member were hesitant to adopt new practices & new personal dashboard. The engineering manager organized training sessions to showcase the benefits of integrating Git and JIRA & having a personal dashboard, promoting buy-in from the team and leaving the default dashboard.

• Maintaining Commit Message Standards: Initially, not all developers consistently used the issue keys in their commit messages. The team revisited training sessions and created a shared repository of best practices to ensure adherence.

Conclusion

While JIRA dashboards are valuable tools for project management, they are insufficient on their own for engineering managers seeking to improve project delivery speed and predictability. By integrating Git data with JIRA, teams can gain richer insights into development activity, enhance collaboration, and manage risks more effectively. This holistic approach empowers engineering leaders to make informed decisions and drive continuous improvement in their software development processes. Embracing this integration will ultimately lead to better project outcomes and a more productive engineering culture. As the software development landscape continues to evolve, leveraging the power of both JIRA and Git data will be essential for teams looking to stay competitive and deliver high-quality products efficiently.

‍

As platform engineering continues to evolve, it brings both promising opportunities and potential challenges. 

As we look to the future, what changes lie ahead for Platform Engineering? In this blog, we will explore the future landscape of platform engineering and strategize how organizations can stay at the forefront of innovation.

What is Platform Engineering? 

Platform Engineering is an emerging technology approach that enables software developers with all the required resources. It acts as a bridge between development and infrastructure which helps in simplifying the complex tasks and enhancing development velocity. The primary goal is to improve developer experience, operational efficiency, and the overall speed of software delivery.

Importance of Platform Engineering

• Platform engineering helps in creating reusable components and standardized processes. It also automates routine tasks, such as deployment, monitoring, and scaling, to speed up the development cycle.

• Platform engineering integrates security measures into the platform to ensure that applications are built and deployed securely. This allows the platform to meet regulatory and compliance requirements.

• It ensures efficient use of resources to balance performance and expenditure. It also provides transparency into resource usage and associated costs to help organizations make informed decisions about scaling and investment.

• By providing tools, frameworks, and services, platform engineering tool empowers developers to build, deploy, and manage applications more effectively.

• A well-engineered platform allows organizations to adapt quickly to market changes, new technologies, and customer needs.

Key Predictions for Platform Engineering

More Focus on Developer Experience

The rise in Platform Engineering will enhance developer experience by creating standard toolchains and workflow. In the coming time, the platform engineering team will work closely with developers to understand what they need to be productive. Moreover, the platform tool will be integrated and closely monitored through DevEx and reports. This will enable developers to work efficiently and focus on the core tasks by automating repetitive tasks, further improving their productivity and satisfaction. 

Rise in Internal Developer Platform 

Platform engineering is closely associated with the development of IDP. In today’s times, organizations are striving for efficiency, hence, the creation and adoption of internal development platforms will rise. This will streamline operations, provide a standardized way of deploying and managing applications, and reduce cognitive load. Hence, reducing time to market for new features and products, allowing developers to focus on delivering high-quality products more efficiently rather than managing infrastructure. 

Growing Trend of Ephemeral Environment 

Modern software development demands rapid iteration. The ephemeral environments, temporary, ideal environments, will be an effective way to test new features and bugs before they are merged into the main codebase. These environments will prioritize speed, flexibility, and cost efficiency. Since they are created on-demand and short-lived, they will align perfectly with modern development practices. 

Integration with Generative AI 

As times are changing, AI-driven tools become more prevalent. These Generative AI tools such as GitHub Copilot and Google Gemini will enhance capabilities such as infrastructure as code, governance as code, and security as code. This will not only automate manual tasks but also support smoother operations and improved documentation processes. Hence, driving innovation and automating dev workflow. 

Extension to DevOps 

Platform engineering is a natural extension of DevOps. In the future, the platform engineers will work alongside DevOps rather than replacing it to address its complexities and scalability challenges. This will provide a standardized and automated approach to software development and deployment leading to faster project initialization, reduced lead time, and increased productivity. 

Shift to Product-Centric Funding Model 

Software organizations are now shifting from project project-centric model towards product product-centric funding model. When platforms are fully-fledged products, they serve internal customers and require a thoughtful and user-centric approach in their ongoing development. It also aligns well with the product lifecycle that is ongoing and continuous which enhances innovation and reduces operational friction. It will also decentralize decision making which allows platform engineering leaders to make and adjust funding decisions for their teams. 

Why Staying Updated on Platform Engineering Trends is Crucial?

• Platform Engineering is a relatively new and evolving field. Hence, platform engineering teams need to keep up with rapid tech changes and ensure the platform remains robust and efficient.

• Emerging technologies such as serverless computers and edge computers will shape the future of platform engineering. Moreover, Artificial intelligence and machine learning also help in optimizing various aspects of software development such as testing and monitoring. 

• Platform engineering trends are introducing new ways to automate processes, manage infrastructure, and optimize workflows. This enables organizations to streamline operations, reduce manual work, and focus on more strategic tasks, leading to enhanced developer productivity. 

• A platform aims to deliver a superior user experience. When platform engineers stay ahead of the learning curve, they can implement features and improvements that improve the end-user experience, resulting in higher customer satisfaction and retention.

• Trends in platform engineering highlight new methods for building scalable and flexible systems. It allows platform engineers to design platforms that can easily adapt to changing demands and scale without compromising performance.

Typo - An Effective Platform Engineering Tool 

Typo is an effective software engineering intelligence platform that offers SDLC visibility, developer insights, and workflow automation to build better programs faster. It can seamlessly integrate into tech tool stacks such as GIT versioning, issue tracker, and CI/CD tools.

It also offers comprehensive insights into the deployment process through key metrics such as change failure rate, time to build, and deployment frequency. Moreover, its automated code tool helps identify issues in the code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master.

Typo has an effective sprint analysis feature that tracks and analyzes the team’s progress throughout a sprint. Besides this, It also provides 360 views of the developer experience i.e. captures qualitative insights and provides an in-depth view of the real issues.

Conclusion 

The future of platform engineering is both exciting and dynamic. As this field continues to evolve, staying ahead of these developments is crucial for organizations aiming to maintain a competitive edge. By embracing these predictions and proactively adapting to changes, platform engineering teams can drive innovation, improve efficiency, and deliver high-quality products that meet the demands of an ever-changing tech landscape.

‍

Platform engineering is a relatively new and evolving field in the tech industry. However, like any evolving field, it comes with its share of challenges. If overlooked can limit its effectiveness.

In this blog post, we dive deep into these common missteps and provide actionable insights to overcome them, so that your platform engineering efforts are both successful and sustainable.

What is Platform Engineering?

Platform Engineering refers to providing foundational tools and services to the development team that allow them to quickly and safely deliver their applications. This aims to increase developer productivity by providing a unified technical platform to streamline the process which helps reduce errors and enhance reliability. 

Core Components of Platform Engineering 

Internal Developer Platform (IDPs) 

The core component of Platform Engineering is IDP i.e. centralized collections of tools, services, and automated workflows that enable developers to self-serve resources needed for building, testing, and deploying applications. It empowers developers to deliver faster by reducing reliance on other teams, automating repetitive tasks, reducing the risk of errors, and ensuring every application adheres to organizational standards.

Platform Team 

The platform team consists of platform engineers who are responsible for building, maintaining, and configuring the IDP. The platform team standardizes workflows, automates repetitive tasks, and ensures that developers have access to the necessary tools and resources. The aim is to create a seamless experience for developers. Hence, allowing them to focus on building applications rather than managing infrastructure. 

Automation and Standardization

Platform engineering focuses on the importance of standardizing processes and automating infrastructure management. This includes creating paved roads for common development tasks such as deployment scripts, testing, and scaling to simplify workflows and reduce friction for developers. Curating a catalog of resources, following predefined templates, and establishing best practices ensure that every deployment follows the same standards, thus enhancing consistency across development efforts while allowing flexibility for individual preferences. 

Continuous Improvement 

Platform engineering is an iterative process, requiring ongoing assessment and enhancement based on developer feedback and changing business needs. This results in continuous improvement that ensures the platform evolves to meet the demands of its users and incorporates new technologies and practices as they emerge. 

Security and Compliance

Security is a key component of platform engineering. Integrating security best practices into the platform such as automated vulnerability scanning, encryption, and compliance monitoring is the best way to protect against vulnerabilities and ensure compliance with relevant regulations. This proactive approach is integrated into all stages of the platform helps mitigate risks associated with software delivery and fosters a secure development environment. 

Common Mistakes in Platform Engineering

Focusing Solely on Dashboards

One of the common mistakes platform engineers make is focusing solely on dashboards without addressing the underlying issues that need solving. While dashboards provide a good overview, they can lead to a superficial understanding of problems instead of encouraging genuine process improvements. 

To avoid this, teams must combine dashboards with automated alerts, tracing, and log analysis to get actionable insights and a more comprehensive observability strategy for faster incident detection and resolution. 

Building without Understanding the Developers’ Needs

Developing a platform based on assumptions ends up not addressing real problems and does not meet the developers’s needs. The platform may lack important features for developers leading to dissatisfaction and low adoption. 

Hence, establishing clear objectives and success criteria vital for guiding development efforts. Engage with developers now and then. Conduct surveys, interviews, or workshops to gather insights into their pain points and needs before building the platform.

Overengineering the Platform 

Building an overlay complex platform hinders rather than helps development efforts. When the platform contains features that aren’t necessary or used by developers, it leads to increased maintenance costs and confusion among developers that further hampers their productivity. 

The goal must be finding the right balance between functionality and simplicity. Hence, ensuring the platform effectively meets the needs of developers without unnecessary complications and iterating it based on actual usage and feedback.

Encouraging One-Size-Fits-All Solution

The belief that a single platform caters to all development teams and uses cases uniformly is a fallacy. Different teams and applications have varying needs, workflows, and technology stacks, necessitating tailored solutions rather than a uniform approach. As a result, the platform may end up being too rigid for some teams and overly complex for some resulting in low adoption and inefficiencies. 

Hence, design a flexible and customizable platform that adapts to diverse requirements. This allows teams to tailor the platform to their specific workflows while maintaining shared standards and governance.

Overplanning and under-executing

Spending excessive time in the planning phase leads to delays in implementation, missed opportunities, and not fully meeting the evolving needs of end-users. When the teams focus on perfecting every detail before implementation it results in the platform remaining theoretical instead of delivering real value.

An effective way is to create a balance between planning and executing by adopting an iterative approach. In other words, focus on delivering a minimum viable product (MVP) quickly and continuously improving it based on real user feedback. This allows the platform to evolve in alignment with actual developer needs which ensures better adoption and more effective outcomes.

Failing to Prioritize Security

Building the platform without incorporating security measures from the beginning can create opportunities for cyber threats and attacks. This also exposes the organization to compliance risks, vulnerabilities, and potential breaches that could be costly to resolve.

Implementing automated security tools, such as identity and access management (IAM), encrypted communications, and code analysis tools helps continuously monitor for security issues and ensure compliance with best practices. Besides this, provide ongoing security training that covers common vulnerabilities, secure coding practices, and awareness of evolving threats.

Benefits of Platform Engineering 

When used correctly, platform engineering offers many benefits: 

• Platform engineering improves developer experience by offering self-service capabilities and standardized tools. It allows the team to focus on building features and deliver products more efficiently and effectively.

• It increases the reliability and security of applications by providing a stable foundation and centralized infrastructure management.

• Engineering teams can deploy applications and updates faster with a robust and automated platform that accelerates the time-to-market for new features and products.

• Focusing on scalable solutions allows Platform engineering to enable the underlying systems to handle increased demand without compromising performance and grow their applications and services efficiently.

• A solid platform foundation allows teams to experiment with new technologies and methodologies. Hence, supporting innovation and the adoption of modern practices.

Typo - An Effective Platform Engineering Tool 

Typo is an effective platform engineering tool that offers SDLC visibility, developer insights, and workflow automation to build better programs faster. It can seamlessly integrate into tech tool stacks such as GIT versioning, issue tracker, and CI/CD tools.

It also offers comprehensive insights into the deployment process through key metrics such as change failure rate, time to build, and deployment frequency. Moreover, its automated code tool helps identify issues in the code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master.

‍

‍

Typo has an effective sprint analysis feature that tracks and analyzes the team’s progress throughout a sprint. Besides this, It also provides 360 views of the developer experience i.e. captures qualitative insights and provides an in-depth view of the real issues.

‍

‍

Conclusion

Platform engineering has immense potential to streamline development and improve efficiency, but avoiding common pitfalls is key. By focusing on the pitfalls mentioned above, you can create a platform that drives productivity and innovation. 

‍

All the best! :) 

‍

‍What is Clean Code? 

Robert C. Martin introduced the ‘Clean Code’ concept in his book ‘Clean Code: A Handbook of Agile Software Craftsmanship’. He defined clean code as: 

“A code that has been taken care of. Someone has taken the time to keep it simple and orderly. They have laid appropriate attention to details. They have cared.”

Clean code is easy to read, understand, and maintain. It is well structured and free of unnecessary complexity, code smell, and anti-patterns. 

Key Characteristics that Define Clean Code

• The code is easy to read and understand. The names are descriptive of variables, functions, and classes, and the code is structured for a clear purpose. 

• The code is simple and doesn’t include any unnecessary complexity. 

• The code is consistent in naming conventions, formatting, and organization to help maintain readability. 

• The code is easy to test and free from bugs and errors. 

• The code is easy to update and modify. 

• Clean code is regularly refactored and free from redundancy. 

Clean Code Principles 

Single Responsibility Principle 

This principle states that each module or function should have a defined responsibility and one reason to change. Otherwise, it can result in bloated and hard-to-maintain code. 

Example: the code’s responsibilities are separated into three distinct classes: User, Authentication, and EmailService. This makes the code more modular, easier to test, and easier to maintain.

class User {

  constructor(name, email, password) {

    this.name = name;

    this.email = email;

    this.password = password;

  }

}

‍

class Authentication {

  login(user, password) {

    // ... login logic

  }

‍

  register(user, password) {

    // ... registration logic

  }

}

‍

class EmailService {

  sendVerificationEmail(email) {

    // ... email sending logic

  }

}

DRY Principle (Don’t Repeat Yourself) 

The DRY Principle states that unnecessary duplication and repetition of code must be avoided. If not followed, it can increase the risk of inconsistency and redundancy. Instead, you can abstract common functionality into reusable functions, classes, or modules.

‍

Example: The common greeting formatting logic is extracted into a reusable formatGreeting function, which makes the code DRY and easier to maintain.

‍

function formatGreeting(name, message) {

  return message + ", " + name + "!";

}

‍

function greetUser(name) {

  console.log(formatGreeting(name, "Hello"));

}

‍

function sayGoodbye(name) {

  console.log(formatGreeting(name, "Goodbye"));

}

YAGNI – you aren’t gonna need it

YAGNI is an extreme programming practice that states “Always implement things when you actually need them, never when you just foresee that you need them.” 

It doesn’t mean avoiding flexibility in code but rather not overengineer everything based on assumptions about future needs. The principle means delivering the most critical features on time and prioritizing them based on necessity. 

Kiss - Keep it Simple, Stupid 

This principle states that the code must be simple over complex to enhance comprehensibility, usability, and maintainability. Direct and clear code is better to avoid making it bloated or confusing. 

‍

Example: The function directly multiplies the length and width to calculate the area and there are no extra steps or conditions that might confuse or complicate the code.

‍

def calculate_area(length, width):

    return length * width

The Boy Scout Rule 

According to ‘The Boy Scout Rule’, always leave the code in a better state than you found it. In other words, make continuous, small enhancements whenever engaging with the codebase. It could be either adding a feature or fixing a bug. It encourages continuous improvement and maintains a high-quality codebase over time. 

‍

Example: The original code had unnecessary complexity due to the redundant variable and nested conditional. The cleaned-up code is more concise and easier to understand.

‍

Before: 

‍

def factorial(n):

    if n == 0:

        return 1

    else:

        return n * factorial(n - 1)

‍

# Before:

result = factorial(5)

print(result)

‍

# After:

print(factorial(5))

‍

After: 

‍

def factorial(n):

    return 1 if n == 0 else n * factorial(n - 1)

Fail Fast

This principle indicates that the code must fail as early as possible. This limits the bugs that make it into production and promptly addresses errors. This ensures the code remains clean, reliable, and usable. 

Open/Closed Principle 

As per the Open/Closed Principle, the software entities should be open to extension but closed to modification. This means that team members must add new functionalities to an existing software system without changing the existing code. 

‍

Example: The Open/Closed Principle allows adding new employee types (like "intern" or "contractor") without modifying the existing calculate_salary function. This makes the system more flexible and maintainable.

‍

Without the Open/Closed Principle 

‍

def calculate_salary(employee_type):

    if employee_type == "regular":

        return base_salary

    elif employee_type == "manager":

        return base_salary * 1.5

    elif employee_type == "executive":

        return base_salary * 2

    else:

        raise ValueError("Invalid employee type")

‍

With the Open/Closed Principle 

‍

class Employee:

    def calculate_salary(self):

        raise NotImplementedError()

‍

class RegularEmployee(Employee):

    def calculate_salary(self):

        return base_salary

‍

class Manager(Employee):

    def calculate_salary(self):

        return base_salary * 1.5

‍

class Executive(Employee):

    def calculate_salary(self):

        return base_salary * 2

Practice Consistently 

When you choose to approach something in a specific way, ensure maintaining consistency throughout the entire project. This includes consistent naming conventions, coding styles, and formatting. It also ensures that the code aligns with team standards, to make it easier for others to understand and work with. Consistent practice also allows you to identify areas for improvement and learn new techniques.

Favor composition over inheritance

This means to use ‘has-a’ relationships (containing instances of other classes) instead of ‘is-a’ relationships (inheriting from a superclass). This makes the code more flexible and maintainable.

‍

Example: In this example, the SportsCar class has a Car object as a member, and it can also have additional components like a spoiler. This makes it more flexible, as we can easily create different types of cars with different combinations of components.

‍

class Engine:

    def start(self):

        pass

‍

class Car:

    def __init__(self, engine):

        self.engine = engine

‍

class SportsCar(Car):

    def __init__(self, engine, spoiler):

        super().__init__(engine)

        self.spoiler = spoiler

Avoid Hard-Coded Number

Avoid hardcoded numbers, rather use named constants or variables to make the code more readable and maintainable.

‍

Example: 

‍

Instead of: 

discount_rate = 0.2

‍

Use: 

DISCOUNT_RATE = 0.2

‍

This makes the code more readable and easier to modify if the discount rate needs to be changed.

Typo - An Automated Code Review Tool

Typo’s automated code review tool enables developers to catch issues related to code issues and detect code smells and potential bugs promptly. 

‍

With automated code reviews, auto-generated fixes, and highlighted hotspots, Typo streamlines the process of merging clean, secure, and high-quality code. It automatically scans your codebase and pull requests for issues, generating safe fixes before merging to master. Hence, ensuring your code stays efficient and error-free.

‍

‍

The ‘Goals’ feature empowers engineering leaders to set specific objectives for their tech teams that directly support writing clean code. By tracking progress and providing performance insights, Typo helps align teams with best practices, making it easier to maintain clean, efficient code. The goals are fully customizable, allowing you to set tailored objectives for different teams simultaneously.

‍

Conclusion 

Writing clean code isn’t just a crucial skill for developers. It is an important way to sustain software development projects.

By following the above-mentioned principles, you can develop a habit of writing clean code. It will take time but it will be worth it in the end.

‍

Platform engineering is a relatively new and evolving field in the tech industry. To make the most of Platform Engineering, there are several best practices you should be aware of.

In this blog, we explore these practices in detail and provide insights into how you can effectively implement them to optimize your development processes and foster innovation.

What is Platform Engineering?

Platform Engineering, an emerging technology approach, is the practice of designing and managing the infrastructure and tools that support software development and deployment. This is to help them perform end-to-end operations of software development lifecycle automation. The aim is to reduce overall cognitive load, increase operational efficiency, and remove process bottlenecks by providing a reliable and scalable platform for building, deploying, and managing applications. 

Importance of Platform Engineering

• Platform engineering improves developer experience by offering self-service capabilities and standardized tools. It allows the team to focus on building features and deliver products more efficiently and effectively. 

• It increases the reliability and security of applications by providing a stable foundation and centralized infrastructure management.

• Engineering teams can deploy applications and updates faster with a robust and automated platform that accelerates the time-to-market for new features and products.

• Focusing on scalable solutions allows Platform engineering to enable the underlying systems to handle increased demand without compromising performance and grow their applications and services efficiently. 

• A solid platform foundation allows teams to experiment with new technologies and methodologies. Hence, supporting innovation and the adoption of modern practices.

Platform Engineering Best Practices

The platform Must be Developer-Centric

Always treat your platform engineering team as paying customers. This allows you to understand developers’ pain points, preferences, and requirements and focus on making the development process easier and more efficient. Some of the key points that are taken into consideration:

• User-friendly tools to streamline the workflow. 

• Must feel at ease while navigating the platform. 

• Seamlessly integrates with existing and other third-party applications. 

• Allow them to access and manage resources without needing extensive support.

When the above-mentioned needs and requirements are met, end-users are likely to adopt this platform enthusiastically. Hence, making the platform more effective and productive. 

Adopt Security Best Practices

Implement security control at every layer of the platform. Make sure that audit security posture is conducted regularly and that everyone on the team is updated with the latest security patches. Besides this, conduct code reviews and code analysis to identify and fix security vulnerabilities quickly. Educate your platform engineering team about security practices and offer them ongoing training and mentorship so they are constantly upskilling. 

Foster Continuous Improvement and Feedback Loops

Continuous improvement must be a core principle to allow the platform to evolve according to technical trends. Integrate feedback mechanisms with the internal developer platform to gather insights from the software development lifecycle. Regularly review and improve the platform based on feedback from development teams. This enables rapid responses to any impediments developers face. 

Encourage a Culture of Collaboration

Foster communication and knowledge sharing among platform engineers. Align them with common goals and objects and recognize their collaborative efforts. This helps teams to understand how their work contributes to the overall success of the platform which further, fosters a sense of unity and purpose. It also ensures that all stakeholders understand how to effectively use the platform and contribute to its continuous improvement. 

Platform Team must have a Product Mindset

View your internal platform as a product that requires management and ongoing development. The platform team must be driven by a product mindset that includes publishing roadmaps, gathering user feedback, and fostering a customer-centric approach. They must focus on what offers real value to their internal customers and app developers based on the feedback, so it addresses the pain points quickly. 

Maintain DevOps Culture

Emphasize the importance of a DevOps culture that prioritizes collaboration between development and operations teams that focuses on learning and improvement rather than assigning time. It is crucial to foster an environment where platform engineering can thrive and foster a shared responsibility for the software lifecycle.

Typo - An Effective Platform Engineering Tool 

Typo is an effective platform engineering tool that offers SDLC visibility, developer insights, and workflow automation to build better programs faster. It can seamlessly integrate into tech tool stacks such as GIT versioning, issue tracker, and CI/CD tools.

It also offers comprehensive insights into the deployment process through key metrics such as change failure rate, time to build, and deployment frequency. Moreover, its automated code tool helps identify issues in the code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master.

‍

‍

Typo has an effective sprint analysis feature that tracks and analyzes the team’s progress throughout a sprint. Besides this, It also provides 360 views of the developer experience i.e. captures qualitative insights and provides an in-depth view of the real issues.

‍

Conclusion

Platform Engineering is reshaping how we approach software development by streamlining infrastructure management and improving operational efficiency. Adhering to best practices allows organizations to harness the full potential of their platforms. Embracing these principles will optimize your development processes, drive innovation, and ensure a stable foundation for future growth.

‍

The era when development and operations teams worked in isolation, rarely interacting, is over. This outdated approach led to significant delays in developing and launching new applications. Modern IT leaders understand that DevOps is a more effective strategy.

DevOps fosters collaboration between software development and IT operations, enhancing the speed, efficiency, and quality of software delivery. By leveraging DevOps tools, the software development process becomes more streamlined through improved team collaboration and automation.

Understanding DevOps

DevOps is a methodology that merges software development (Dev) with IT operations (Ops) to shorten the development lifecycle while maintaining high software quality.

Creating a DevOps culture promotes collaboration, which is essential for continuous delivery. IT operations and development teams share ideas and provide prompt feedback, accelerating the application launch cycle.

Importance of DevOps for Startups

In the competitive startup environment, time equates to money. Delayed product launches risk competitors beating you to market. Even with an early market entry, inefficient development processes can hinder timely feature rollouts that customers need.

Implementing DevOps practice helps startups keep pace with industry leaders, speeding up development without additional resource expenditure, improving customer experience, and aligning with business needs.

Core Principles of DevOps

The foundation of DevOps rests on the principles of culture, automation, measurement, and sharing (CAMS). These principles drive continuous improvement and innovation in startups.

Key Benefits of DevOps for Startups

Faster Time-to-Market

DevOps accelerates development and release processes through automated workflows and continuous feedback integration.

• Startups can rapidly launch new features, fix bugs, and update software, gaining a competitive advantage.

• Implement continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines.

• Use automated testing to identify issues early.

Improved Efficiency

DevOps enhances workflow efficiency by automating repetitive tasks and minimizing manual errors.

• Utilize configuration management tools like Ansible and Chef.

• Implement containerization with Docker for consistency across environments.

• Jenkins for CI/CD

• Docker for containerization

• Kubernetes for orchestration

Enhanced Reliability

DevOps ensures code changes are continuously tested and validated, reducing failure risks.

• Conduct regular automated testing.

• Continuously monitor applications and infrastructure.

• Increased reliability leads to higher customer satisfaction and retention.

DevOps Practices for Startups

Embrace Automation with CI/CD Tools

Automation tools are essential for accelerating the software delivery process. Startups should use CI/CD tools to automate testing, integration, and deployment. Recommended tools include:

• Jenkins: An open-source automation server that supports building and deploying applications.

• GitLab CI/CD: Integrated CI/CD capabilities within GitLab for seamless pipeline management.

• CircleCI: A cloud-based CI/CD tool that offers fast builds and easy integration with various services.

Implement Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD)

CI/CD practices enable frequent code changes and deployments. Key components include:

• Version Control Systems (VCS): Use Git with platforms like GitHub or Bitbucket for efficient code management.

• Build Automation: Tools like Maven or Gradle for Java projects, or npm scripts for Node.js, automate the build process.

• Deployment Automation: Utilize tools like Spinnaker or Argo CD for managing Kubernetes deployments.

Utilize Infrastructure as Code (IaC)

IaC allows startups to manage infrastructure through code, ensuring consistency and reducing manual errors. Consider using:

• Terraform: For provisioning and managing cloud infrastructure in a declarative manner.

• AWS CloudFormation: For defining infrastructure using YAML or JSON templates.

• Ansible: For configuration management and application deployment.

Adopt Containerization

Containerization simplifies deployment and improves resource utilization. Use:

• Docker: To package applications and their dependencies into lightweight, portable containers.

• Kubernetes: For orchestrating containerized applications, enabling scaling and management.

Monitor and Measure Performance

Implement robust monitoring tools to gain visibility into application performance. Recommended tools include:

• Prometheus: For real-time monitoring and alerting.

• Grafana: For visualizing metrics and logs.

• ELK Stack (Elasticsearch, Logstash, Kibana): For centralized logging and data analysis.

Integrate Security (DevSecOps)

Incorporate security practices into the DevOps pipeline using:

• Snyk: For identifying vulnerabilities in open-source dependencies.

• SonarQube: For continuous inspection of code quality and security vulnerabilities.

• HashiCorp Vault: For managing secrets and protecting sensitive data.

Leverage Software Engineering Intelligence (SEI) Platforms

SEI platforms provide critical insights into the engineering processes, enhancing decision-making and efficiency. Key features include:

• Data Integration: SEI platforms like Typo ingest data from various tools (e.g., GitHub, JIRA) to provide a holistic view of the development pipeline.

• Actionable Insights: These platforms analyze data to identify bottlenecks and inefficiencies, enabling teams to optimize workflows and improve delivery speed.

• DORA Metrics: SEI platforms track key metrics such as deployment frequency, lead time for changes, change failure rate, and time to restore service, helping teams measure their performance against industry standards.

Foster Collaboration and Communication

Utilize collaborative tools to enhance communication among team members. Recommended tools include:

• Slack: For real-time communication and integration with other DevOps tools.

• JIRA: For issue tracking and agile project management.

• Confluence: For documentation and knowledge sharing.

Encourage Continuous Learning

Promote a culture of continuous learning through:

• Internal Workshops: Regularly scheduled sessions on new tools or methodologies.

• Online Courses: Encourage team members to take courses on platforms like Coursera or Udemy.

Establish Clear Standards and Documentation

Create a repository for documentation and coding standards using:

• Markdown: For easy-to-read documentation within code repositories.

• GitHub Pages: For hosting project documentation directly from your GitHub repository.

How Typo Helps DevOps Teams?

Typo is a powerful tool designed specifically for tracking and analyzing DevOps metrics. It provides an efficient solution for dev and ops teams seeking precision in their performance measurement.

‍

‍

• With pre-built integrations in the dev tool stack, the dashboard provides all the relevant data within minutes.

• It helps in deep diving and correlating different metrics to identify real-time bottlenecks, sprint delays, blocked PRs, deployment efficiency, and much more from a single dashboard.

• The dashboard sets custom improvement goals for each team and tracks their success in real time.

• It gives real-time visibility into a team’s KPI and lets them make informed decisions.

Conclusion

Implementing DevOps best practices can markedly boost the agility, productivity, and dependability of startups.

By integrating continuous integration and deployment, leveraging infrastructure as code, employing automated testing, and maintaining continuous monitoring, startups can effectively tackle issues like limited resources and skill shortages.

Moreover, fostering a cooperative culture is essential for successful DevOps adoption. By adopting these strategies, startups can create durable, scalable solutions for end users and secure long-term success in a competitive landscape.

‍

DORA metrics offer a valuable framework for assessing software delivery performance throughout the software delivery lifecycle. Measuring DORA key metrics allows engineering leaders to identify bottlenecks, improve efficiency, and enhance software quality, which impacts customer satisfaction. It is also a key indicator for measuring the effectiveness of continuous delivery pipelines.

In this blog post, we delve into the pros and cons of utilizing DORA metrics to optimize continuous delivery processes, exploring their impact on performance, efficiency, and delivering high-quality software

What are DORA Metrics?

DORA metrics were developed by the DORA team founded by Gene Kim, Jez Humble, and Dr. Nicole Forsgren. These metrics are key performance indicators that measure the effectiveness and efficiency of the software delivery process and provide a data-driven approach to evaluate the impact of operational practices on software delivery performance.

Four Key DORA Metrics

• Deployment Frequency measures how often code is deployed into production per week.

• Lead Time for Changes measures the time it takes for code changes to move from inception to deployment.

• Change Failure Rate measures the code quality released to production during software deployments.

• Mean Time to Recover measures the time to recover a system or service after an incident or failure in production.

In 2021, the DORA Team added Reliability as a fifth metric. It is based upon how well the user’s expectations are met, such as availability and performance, and measures modern operational practices.

Importance of Continuous Delivery for DORA Metrics

Continuous delivery (CD) is a primary aspect of modern software development that automatically prepares code changes for release to a production environment. It is combined with continuous integration (CI) and together, these two practices are known as CI/CD.

CD pipelines hold significant importance compared to traditional waterfall-style development. A few of them are:

Faster Time to Market

Continuous Delivery allows more frequent releases, allowing new features, improvements, and bug fixes to be delivered to end-users more quickly. It provides a competitive advantage by keeping the product up-to-date and responsive to user needs, which enhances customer satisfaction.

Improved Quality and Reliability

Automated testing and consistent deployment processes catch bugs and issues early. It improves the overall quality and reliability of the software and reduces the chances of defects reaching production.

Reduced Deployment Risk

When updates are smaller and more frequent, it reduces the complexity and risk associated with each deployment. If an issue does arise, it becomes easier to pinpoint the problem and roll back the changes.

Scalability

CD practices can be scaled to accommodate growing development teams and more complex applications. It helps to manage the increasing demands of modern software development.

Innovation and Experimentation

Continuous delivery allows teams to experiment with new ideas and features efficiently. This encourages innovation by allowing quick feedback and iteration cycles. 

Enhances Performance Visibility

• Deployment Frequency: High deployment frequency indicates a team’s ability to deliver updates and new features quickly and consistently.

• Lead Time for Changes: Short lead times suggest a more efficient delivery process.

• Change Failure Rate: A lower rate highlights better testing and higher quality in releases.

• Mean Time to Restore (MTTR): A lower MTTR indicates a team’s capability to respond to and fix issues rapidly.

Increases Operational Efficiency

Implementing DORA metrics encourages teams to streamline their processes, reducing bottlenecks and inefficiencies in the delivery pipeline. It also allows the team to regularly measure and analyze these metrics which fosters a culture of continuous improvement. As a result, teams are motivated to identify and resolve inefficiencies.

Fosters Collaboration and Communication

Tracking DORA metrics encourages collaboration between DevOps and other stakeholders. Hence, fostering a more integrated and cooperative approach to software delivery. It further provides objective data that teams can use to make informed decisions, prioritize work, and align their efforts with business goals.

Improves Software Quality

Continuous Delivery relies heavily on automated testing to catch defects early. DORA metrics help software teams track the testing processes’ effectiveness which ensures higher software quality. Faster deployment cycles and lower lead times enable quicker feedback from end-users. It allows software development teams to address issues and improve the product more swiftly.

Increases Reliability and Stability

Software teams can ensure that their deployments are more reliable and less prone to issues by monitoring and aiming to reduce the change failure rate. A low MTTR demonstrates a team’s capability to quickly recover from failures which minimizes downtime and its impact on users. Hence, increases the reliability and stability of the software.

Effective Incident Management

Incident management is an integral part of CD as it helps quickly address and resolve any issues that arise. This aligns with the DORA metric for Time to Restore Service as it ensures that any disruptions are quickly addressed, minimizing downtime, and maintaining service reliability.

Cons of DORA Metrics for Continuous Delivery

Implementation Challenges

The process of setting up the necessary software to measure DORA metrics accurately can be complex and time-consuming. Besides this, inaccurate or incomplete data can lead to misleading metrics which can affect decision-making and process improvements.

Resource Allocation Issues

Implementing and maintaining the necessary infrastructure to track DORA metrics can be resource-intensive. It potentially diverts resources from other important areas and increases the risk of disproportionately allocating resources to high-performing teams or projects to improve metrics.

Limited Scope of Metrics

DORA metrics focus on specific aspects of the delivery process and may not capture other crucial factors including security, compliance, or user satisfaction. It is also not universally applicable as the relevance and effectiveness of DORA metrics can vary across different types of projects, teams, and organizations. What works well for one team may not be suitable for another.

Cultural Resistance

Implementing DORA DevOps metrics requires changes in culture and mindset, which can be met with resistance from teams that are accustomed to traditional methods. Apart from this, ensuring that DORA metrics align with broader business goals and are understood by all stakeholders can be challenging.

Subjectivity in Measurement

While DORA Metrics are quantitative in nature, their interpretation and application of DORA metrics can be highly subjective. The definition and measuring metrics like ‘Lead Time for Changes’ or ‘MTTR’ can vary significantly across teams. It may result in inconsistencies in how these metrics are understood and applied across different teams.

How does Typo Solve this Issue?

As the tech landscape is evolving, there is a need for diverse evaluation tools in software development. Relying solely on DORA metrics can result in a narrow understanding of performance and progress. Hence, software development organizations necessitate a multifaceted evaluation approach.

And that’s why, Typo is here at your rescue!

Typo is an effective software engineering intelligence platform that offers SDLC visibility, developer insights, and workflow automation to build better programs faster. It can seamlessly integrate into tech tool stacks such as GIT versioning, issue tracker, and CI/CD tools. It also offers comprehensive insights into the deployment process through key metrics such as change failure rate, time to build, and deployment frequency. Its automated code tool helps identify issues in the code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master.‍

‍

Features

• Offers customized DORA metrics and other engineering metrics that can be configured in a single dashboard.

• Includes effective sprint analysis feature that tracks and analyzes the team’s progress throughout a sprint.

• Provides 360 views of the developer experience i.e. captures qualitative insights and provides an in-depth view of the real issues.

• Offers engineering benchmark to compare the team’s results across industries.

• User-friendly interface.‍

‍

‍

Conclusion

While DORA metrics offer valuable insights into software delivery performance, they have their limitations. Typo provides a robust platform that complements DORA metrics by offering deeper insights into developer productivity and workflow efficiency, helping engineering teams achieve the best possible software delivery outcomes.

Let’s take a look at the situation below: 

You are driving a high-performance car, but the controls are clunky, the dashboard is confusing, and the engine constantly overheats. 

Frustrating, right? 

When developers work in a similar environment, dealing with inefficient tools, unclear processes, and a lack of collaboration, it leads to decreased morale and productivity. 

Just as a smooth, responsive driving experience makes all the difference on the road, a seamless Developer Experience (DX) is essential for developer teams.

DX isn't just a buzzword; it's a key factor in how developers interact with their work environments and produce innovative solutions. In this blog, let’s explore what Developer Experience truly means and why it is crucial for developers. 

What is Developer Experience? 

Developer Experience, commonly known as DX, is the overall quality of developers’ interactions with their work environment. It encompasses tools, processes, and organizational culture. It aims to create an environment where developers are working efficiently, focused, and producing high-quality code with minimal friction. 

Why Does Developer Experience Matter? 

Developer Experience is a critical factor in enhancing organizational performance and innovation. It matters because:

Boosts Developer Productivity 

When developers have access to intuitive tools, clear documentation, and streamlined workflow, it allows them to complete the tasks quicker and focus on core activities. This leads to a faster development cycle and improved efficiency as developers can connect emotionally with their work. 

‍

High Product Quality 

Positive developer experience leads to improved code quality, resulting in high-quality work. This leads to customer satisfaction and a decrease in defects in software products. DX also leads to effective communication and collaboration which reduces cognitive load among developers and can thoroughly implement best practices. 

Talent Attraction and Retention 

A positive work environment appeals to skilled developers and retains top talents. When the organization supports developers’ creativity and innovation, it significantly reduces turnover rates. Moreover, when they feel psychologically safe to express ideas and take risks, they would want to be associated with an organization for the long run. 

Enhances Developer Morale 

When developers feel empowered and supported at their workplace, they are more likely to be engaged with their work. This further leads to high morale and job satisfaction. When organizations minimize common pain points, developers encounter fewer obstacles, allowing them to focus more on productive tasks rather than tedious ones.

Competitive Advantage 

Organizations with positive developer experiences often gain a competitive edge in the market. Enabling faster development cycles and higher-quality software delivery allows companies to respond more swiftly to market demands and customer needs. This agility improves customer satisfaction and positions the organization favorably against competitors. 

What is Flow State and Why Consider it as a Core Goal of a Great DX? 

In simple words, flow state means ‘Being in the zone’. Also known as deep work, it refers to the mental state characterized by complete immersion and focused engagement in an activity. Achieving flow can significantly result in a sense of engagement, enjoyment, and productivity. 

Flow state is considered a core goal of a great DX because this allows developers to work with remarkable efficiency. Hence, allowing them to complete tasks faster and with higher quality. It enables developers to generate innovative solutions and ideas when they are deeply engaged in their work, leading to better problem-solving outcomes. 

Also, flow isn’t limited to individual work, it can also be experienced collectively within teams. When development teams achieve flow together, they operate with synchronized efficiency which enhances collaboration and communication. 

What Developer Experience is not?  

Developer Experience is Not Just a Good Tooling 

Tools like IDEs, frameworks, and libraries play a vital role in a positive developer experience, but, it is not the sole component. Good tooling is merely a part of the overall experience. It helps to streamline workflows and reduce friction, but DX encompasses much more, such as documentation, support, learning resources, and the community. Tools alone cannot address issues like poor communication, lack of feedback, or insufficient documentation, and without a holistic approach, these tools can still hinder developer satisfaction and productivity.

Developer Experience is Not a Quick Fix 

Improving DX isn’t a one-off task that can be patched quickly. It requires a long-term commitment and a deep understanding of developer needs, consistent feedback loops, and iterative improvements. Great developer experience involves ongoing evaluation and adaptation of processes, tools, and team dynamics to create an environment where developers can thrive over time. 

Developer Experience isn’t About Pampering Developers or Using AI tools to Cut Costs

One common myth about DX is that it focuses solely on pampering developers or uses AI tools as cost-cutting measures. True DX aims to create an environment where developers can work efficiently and effectively. In other words, it is about empowering developers with the right resources, autonomy, and opportunities for growth. While AI tools help in simplifying tasks, without considering the broader context of developer needs may lead to dissatisfaction if those tools do not genuinely enhance their work experience. 

Developer Experience is Not User Experience 

DX and UX look alike, however, they target different audiences and goals. User Experience is about how end-users interact with a product, while Developer Experience concerns the experience of developers who build, test, and deploy products. Improving DX involves understanding developers' unique challenges and needs rather than only applying UX principles meant for end-users.

Developer Experience is Not Same as Developer Productivity 

Developer Experience and Developer Productivity are interrelated yet not identical. While a positive developer experience can lead to increased productivity, productivity metrics alone don’t reflect the quality of the developer experience. These metrics often focus on output (like lines of code or hours worked), which can be misleading. True DX encompasses emotional satisfaction, engagement levels, and the overall environment in which developers work. Positive developer experience further creates conditions that naturally lead to higher productivity rather than measuring it directly through traditional metrics

How does Typo Help to Improve DevEx?

Typo is a valuable tool for software development teams that captures 360 views of developer experience. It helps with early indicators of their well-being and actionable insights on the areas that need attention through signals from work patterns and continuous AI-driven pulse check-ins.

Key features

• Research-backed framework that captures parameters and uncovers real issues.
• In-depth insights are published on the dashboard.
• Combines data-driven insights with proactive monitoring and strategic intervention.
• Identifies the key priority areas affecting developer productivity and well-being.
• Sends automated alerts to identify burnout signs in developers at an early stage.

‍

‍

Conclusion 

Developer Experience empowers developers to focus on building exceptional solutions. A great DX fosters innovation, enhances productivity, and creates an environment where developers can thrive individually and collaboratively.

Implementing developer tools empowers organizations to enhance DX and enable teams to prevent burnout and reach their full potential.

‍

What if we told you that writing more code could be making you less productive? 

While equating productivity with output is tempting, developer efficiency is far more complex. The real challenge often lies in processes, collaboration, and well-being. Without addressing these, inefficiencies and burnout will inevitably follow.

You may spend hours coding, only to feel your work isn’t making an impact—projects get delayed, bug fixes drag on, and constant context switching drains your focus. The key isn’t to work harder but smarter by solving the root causes of these issues.

The SPACE framework addresses this by focusing on five dimensions: Satisfaction, Performance, Activity, Communication, and Efficiency. It helps teams improve how much they do and how effectively they work, reducing workflow friction, improving collaboration, and supporting well-being to boost long-term productivity.

Understanding the SPACE Framework

The space framework addresses five key dimensions of developer productivity: satisfaction and well-being, performance, activity, collaboration and communication, and efficiency and flow. Together, these dimensions provide a comprehensive view of how developers work and where improvements can be made, beyond just measuring output.

By taking these factors into account, teams can better support developers, helping them not only produce better work but also maintain their motivation and well-being. Let’s take a closer look at each part of the framework and how it can help your team achieve a balance between productivity and a healthy work environment.

Common Developer Challenges that SPACE Addresses

In fast-paced, tech-driven environments, developers face several roadblocks to productivity:

• Constant interruptions: Developers often deal with frequent context switching, from bug fixes to feature development to emergency support, making it hard to stay focused.
• Cross-team collaboration: Working with multiple teams, such as DevOps, QA, and product management, can lead to miscommunication and misaligned priorities.
• Lack of real-time feedback: Without timely feedback, developers may unknowingly veer off course or miss performance issues until much later in the development cycle.
• Technical debt: Legacy systems and inconsistent coding practices create overhead and slow down development cycles, making it harder to move quickly on new features.

The space framework helps identify and address these challenges by focusing on improving both the technical processes and the developer experience.

How SPACE can help: A Deep Dive into Each Dimension

Let’s explore how each aspect of the space framework can directly impact technical teams:

Satisfaction and well-being

Developers are more productive when they feel engaged and valued. It's important to create an environment where developers are recognized for their contributions and have a healthy work-life balance. This can include feedback mechanisms, peer recognition, or even mental health initiatives. Automated tools that reduce repetitive tasks can also contribute to overall well-being.

Performance

Measuring performance should go beyond tracking the number of commits or pull requests. It’s about understanding the impact of the work being done. High-performing teams focus on delivering high-quality code and minimizing technical debt. Integrating automated testing and static code analysis tools into your CI/CD pipeline ensures code quality is maintained without manual intervention.

Activity

Focusing on meaningful developer activity, such as code reviews, tests written, and pull requests merged, helps align efforts with goals. Tools that track and visualize developer activities provide insight into how time is spent. For example, tracking code review completion times or how often changes are being pushed can reveal bottlenecks or opportunities for improving workflows.

Collaboration and communication

Effective communication across teams reduces friction in the development process. By integrating communication tools directly into the workflow, such as through Git or CI/CD notifications, teams can stay aligned on project goals. Automating feedback loops within the development process, such as notifications when builds succeed or fail, helps teams respond faster to issues.

Efficiency and flow

Developers enter a “flow state” when they can work on a task without distractions. One way to foster this is by reducing manual tasks and interruptions. Implementing CI/CD tools that automate repetitive tasks—like build testing or deployments—frees up developers to focus on writing code. It’s also important to create dedicated time blocks where developers can work without interruptions, helping them enter and maintain that flow.

Practical Strategies for Applying the SPACE Framework

To make the space framework actionable, here are some practical strategies your team can implement:

Automate repetitive tasks to enhance focus

A large portion of developer time is spent on tasks that can easily be automated, such as code formatting, linting, and testing. By introducing tools that handle these tasks automatically, developers can focus on the more meaningful aspects of their work, like writing new features or fixing bugs. This is where tools like Typo can make a difference. Typo integrates seamlessly into your development process, ensuring that code adheres to best practices by automating code quality checks and providing real-time feedback. Automating these reviews reduces the time developers spend on manual reviews and ensures consistency across the codebase.

Track meaningful metrics

Instead of focusing on superficial metrics like lines of code written or hours logged, focus on tracking activities that lead to tangible progress. Typo, for example, helps track key metrics like the number of pull requests merged, the percentage of code coverage, or the speed at which developers address code reviews. These insights give team leads a clearer picture of where bottlenecks are occurring and help teams prioritize tasks that move the project forward.

Improve communication and collaboration through integrated tools

Miscommunication between developers, product managers, and QA teams can cause delays and frustration. Integrating feedback systems that provide automatic notifications when tests fail or builds succeed can significantly improve collaboration. Typo plays a role here by streamlining communication between teams. By automatically reporting code review statuses or deployment readiness, Typo ensures that everyone stays informed without the need for constant manual updates or status meetings.

Protect flow time and eliminate disruptions

Protecting developer flow is essential to maintaining efficiency. Schedule dedicated “flow” periods where meetings are minimized, and developers can focus solely on their tasks. Typo enhances this by minimizing the need for developers to leave their coding environment to check on build statuses or review feedback. With automated reports, developers can stay updated without disrupting their focus. This helps ensure that developers can spend more time in their flow state and less time on administrative tasks.

Identify bottlenecks in your workflow

Using metrics from tools like Typo, you can gain visibility into where delays are happening in your development process—whether it's slow code review cycles, inefficient testing processes, or unclear requirements. With this insight, you can make targeted improvements, such as adjusting team structures, automating manual testing processes, or dedicating more resources to code reviews to ensure smoother project progression.

How Typo supports the SPACE framework

By using Typo as part of your workflow, you can naturally align with many of the principles of the space framework:

• Automated code quality: Typo ensures code quality through automated reviews and real-time feedback, reducing the manual effort required during code review processes.
• Tracking developer metrics: Typo tracks key activities that are directly related to developer efficiency, helping teams stay on track with performance goals.
• Seamless communication: With automatic notifications and updates, Typo ensures that developers and other team members stay in sync without manual reporting, which helps maintain flow and improve collaboration.
• Supporting flow: Typo’s integrations provide updates within the development environment, reducing the need for developers to context switch between tasks.

Bringing it all together: Maximizing Developer Productivity with SPACE

The space framework offers a well-rounded approach to improving developer productivity and well-being. By focusing on automating repetitive tasks, improving collaboration, and fostering uninterrupted flow time, your team can achieve more without sacrificing quality or developer satisfaction. Tools like Typo naturally fit into this process, helping teams streamline workflows, enhance communication, and maintain high code quality.

If you’re looking to implement the space framework, start by automating repetitive tasks and protecting your developers' flow time. Gradually introduce improvements in collaboration and tracking meaningful activity. Over time, you’ll notice improvements in both productivity and the overall well-being of your development team.

What challenges are you facing in your development workflow? 

Share your experiences and let us know how tools like Typo could help your team implement the space framework to improve productivity and collaboration!

Schedule a demo with Typo today! 

‍

Developer productivity is the new buzzword across the industry. Suddenly, measuring developer productivity has started going mainstream after the remote work culture, and companies like McKinsey are publishing articles titled - ”Yes, you can measure software developer productivity” causing a stir in the software development community, So we thought we should share our take on- Developer Productivity.

We will be covering the following Whats, Whys & Hows about Developer Productivity in this piece-

• What is developer productivity?
• Why do we need to measure developer productivity?
• How do we measure it at the Team and individual level? & Why is it more complicated to measure developer productivity than Sales or Hiring productivity?
• Challenges & Dangers of measuring developer productivity & What not to measure.
• What is the impact of measuring developer productivity on engineering culture?

What is Developer Productivity?

Developer productivity refers to the effectiveness and efficiency with which software developers create high-quality software that meets business goals. It encompasses various dimensions, including code quality, development speed, team collaboration, and adherence to best practices. For engineering managers and leaders, understanding developer productivity is essential for driving continuous improvement and achieving successful project outcomes.

Key Aspects of Developer Productivity

Quality of Output: Developer productivity is not just about the quantity of code or code changes produced; it also involves the quality of that code. High-quality code is maintainable, readable, and free of significant bugs, which ultimately contributes to the overall success of a project.

Development Speed: This aspect measures how quickly developers (usually referred as developer velocity) can deliver features, fixes, and updates. While developer velocity is important, it should not come at the expense of code quality. Effective engineering teams strike a balance between delivering quickly and maintaining high standards.

Collaboration and Team Dynamics: Successful software development relies heavily on effective teamwork. Collaboration tools and practices that foster communication and knowledge sharing can significantly enhance developer productivity. Engineering managers should prioritize creating a collaborative environment that encourages teamwork.

Adherence to Best Practices for Outcomes: Following coding standards, conducting code review, and implementing testing protocols are essential for maintaining development productivity. These practices ensure that developers produce high-quality work consistently, which can lead to improved project outcomes.

Wanna Improve your Dev Productivity?

Why do we need to measure dev productivity?

We all know that no love to be measured but the CEOs & CFOs have an undying love for measuring the ROI of their teams, which we can't ignore. The more the development productivity, the more the RoI. However, measuring developer productivity is essential for engineering managers and leaders too who want to optimize their teams' performance- We can't improve something that we don't measure.

Understanding how effectively developers work can lead to improved project outcomes, better resource allocation, and enhanced team morale. In this section, we will explore the key reasons why measuring developer productivity is crucial for engineering management.

Enhancing Team Performance

Measuring developer productivity allows engineering managers to identify strengths and weaknesses within their teams. By analyzing developer productivity metrics, leaders can pinpoint areas where new developer excel and where they may need additional support or resources. This insight enables managers to tailor training programs, allocate tasks more effectively, and foster a culture of continuous improvement.

‍

‍

Driving Business Outcomes

Developer productivity is directly linked to business success. By measuring development team productivity, managers can assess how effectively their teams deliver features, fix bugs, and contribute to overall project goals. Understanding productivity levels helps align development efforts with business objectives, ensuring that the team is focused on delivering value that meets customer needs.

Improving Resource Allocation

Effective measurement of developer productivity enables better resource allocation. By understanding how much time and effort are required for various tasks, managers can make informed decisions about staffing, project timelines, and budget allocation. This ensures that resources are utilized efficiently, minimizing waste and maximizing output.

Fostering a Positive Work Environment

Measuring developer productivity can also contribute to a positive work environment. By recognizing high-performing teams and individuals, managers can boost morale and motivation. Additionally, understanding productivity trends can help identify burnout or dissatisfaction, allowing leaders to address issues proactively and create a healthier workplace culture.

‍

Facilitating Data-Driven Decisions

In today’s fast-paced software development landscape, data-driven decision-making is essential. Measuring developer productivity provides concrete data that can inform strategic decisions. Whether it's choosing new tools, adopting agile methodologies, or implementing process changes, having reliable developer productivity metrics allows managers to make informed choices that enhance team performance.

‍

‍

Encouraging Collaboration and Communication

Regularly measuring productivity can highlight the importance of collaboration and communication within teams. By assessing metrics related to teamwork, such as code reviews and pair programming sessions, managers can encourage practices that foster collaboration. This not only improves productivity but overall developer experience by strengthening team dynamics and knowledge sharing.

Ultimately, understanding developer experience and measuring developer productivity leads to better outcomes for both the team and the organization as a whole.

How do we measure Developer Productivity?

Measuring developer productivity is essential for engineering managers and leaders who want to optimize their teams' performance.

Strategies for Measuring Productivity

Focus on Outcomes, Not Outputs: Shift the emphasis from measuring outputs like lines of code to focusing on outcomes that align with business objectives. This encourages developers to think more strategically about the impact of their work.

Measure at the Team Level: Assess productivity at the team level rather than at the individual level. This fosters team collaboration, knowledge sharing, and a focus on collective goals rather than individual competition.

Incorporate Qualitative Feedback: Balance quantitative metrics with qualitative feedback from developers through surveys, interviews, and regular check-ins. This provides valuable context and helps identify areas for improvement.

Encourage Continuous Improvement: Position productivity measurement as a tool for continuous improvement rather than a means of evaluation. Encourage developers to use metrics to identify areas for growth and work together to optimize workflows and development processes.

Lead by Example: As engineering managers and leaders, model the behavior you want to see in your team & team members. Prioritize work-life balance, encourage risk-taking and innovation, and create an environment where developers feel supported and empowered.

Measuring Dev productivity involves assessing both team and individual contributions to understand how effectively developers are delivering value through their development processes. Here’s how to approach measuring productivity at both levels:

Team-Level Developer Productivity

Measuring productivity at the team level provides a more comprehensive view of how collaborative efforts contribute to project success. Here are some effective metrics:

DORA Metrics

The DevOps Research and Assessment (DORA) metrics are widely recognized for evaluating team performance. Key metrics include:

• Deployment Frequency: How often the software engineering team releases code to production.
• ‍Lead Time for Changes: The time taken for committed code to reach production.
• ‍Change Failure Rate: The percentage of deployments that result in failures.
• ‍Time to Restore Service: The time taken to recover from a failure.

Issue Cycle Time‍

This metric measures the time taken from the start of work on a task to its completion, providing insights into the efficiency of the software development process.

Team Satisfaction and Engagement‍

Surveys and feedback mechanisms can gauge team morale and satisfaction, which are critical for long-term productivity.

Collaboration Metrics‍

Assessing the frequency and quality of code reviews, pair programming sessions, and communication can provide insights into how well the software engineering team collaborates.

Individual Developer Productivity

While team-level metrics are crucial, individual developer productivity also matters, particularly for performance evaluations and personal development. Here are some metrics to consider:

• Pull Requests and Code Reviews: Tracking the number of pull requests submitted and the quality of code reviews can provide insights into an individual developer's engagement and effectiveness.

• Commit Frequency: Measuring how often a developer commits code can indicate their active participation in projects, though it should be interpreted with caution to avoid incentivizing quantity over quality.

• Personal Goals and Outcomes: Setting individual objectives related to project deliverables and tracking their completion can help assess individual productivity in a meaningful way.

• Skill Development: Encouraging developers to pursue training and certifications can enhance their skills, contributing to overall productivity.

Measuring developer productivity metrics presents unique challenges compared to more straightforward metrics used in sales or hiring. Here are some reasons why:

• Complexity of Work: Software development involves intricate problem-solving, creativity, and collaboration, making it difficult to quantify contributions accurately. Unlike sales, where metrics like revenue generated are clear-cut, developer productivity encompasses various qualitative aspects that are harder to measure for project management.

• Collaborative Nature: Development work is highly collaborative. Team members often intertwine with team efforts, making it challenging to isolate the impact of one developer's work. In sales, individual performance is typically more straightforward to assess based on personal sales figures.

• Inadequate Traditional Metrics: Traditional metrics such as Lines of Code (LOC) and commit frequency often fail to capture the true essence of developer productivity of a pragmatic engineer. These metrics can incentivize quantity over quality, leading developers to produce more code without necessarily improving the software's functionality or maintainability. This focus on superficial metrics can distort the understanding of a developer's actual contributions.

• Varied Work Activities: Developers engage in various activities beyond coding, including debugging, code reviews, and meetings. These essential tasks are often overlooked in productivity measurements, whereas sales roles typically have more consistent and quantifiable activities.

• Productivity Tools and Software development Process: The developer productivity tools and methodologies used in software development are constantly changing, making it difficult to establish consistent metrics. In contrast, sales processes tend to be more stable, allowing for easier benchmarking and comparison.

By employing a balanced approach that considers both quantitative and qualitative factors, with a few developer productivity tools, engineering leaders can gain valuable insights into their teams' productivity and foster an environment of continuous improvement & better developer experience.

Challenges of measuring Developer Productivity - What not to Measure?

Measuring developer productivity is a critical task for engineering managers and leaders, yet it comes with its own set of challenges and potential pitfalls. Understanding these challenges is essential to avoid the dangers of misinterpretation and to ensure that developer productivity metrics genuinely reflect the contributions of developers. In this section, we will explore the challenges of measuring developer productivity and highlight what not to measure.

Challenges of Measuring Developer Productivity

• Complexity of Software Development: Software development is inherently complex, involving creativity, problem-solving, and collaboration. Unlike more straightforward fields like sales, where performance can be quantified through clear metrics (e.g., sales volume), developer productivity is multifaceted and includes various non-tangible elements. This complexity makes it difficult to establish a one-size-fits-all metric.

• Inadequate Traditional Metrics: Traditional metrics such as Lines of Code (LOC) and commit frequency often fail to capture the true essence of developer productivity. These metrics can incentivize quantity over quality, leading developers to produce more code without necessarily improving the software's functionality or maintainability. This focus on superficial metrics can distort the understanding of a developer's actual contributions.

• Team Dynamics and Collaboration: Measuring individual productivity can overlook the collaborative nature of software development. Developers often work in teams where their contributions are interdependent. Focusing solely on individual metrics may ignore the synergistic effects of collaboration, mentorship, and knowledge sharing, which are crucial for a team's overall success.

• Context Ignorance: Developer productivity metrics often fail to consider the context in which developers work. Factors such as project complexity, team dynamics, and external dependencies can significantly impact productivity but are often overlooked in traditional assessments. This lack of context can lead to misleading conclusions about a developer's performance.

• Potential for Misguided Incentives: Relying heavily on specific metrics can create perverse incentives. For example, if developers are rewarded based on the number of commits, they may prioritize frequent small commits over meaningful contributions. This can lead to a culture of "gaming the system" rather than fostering genuine productivity and innovation.

What Not to Measure

• Lines of Code (LOC): While LOC can provide some insight into coding activity, it is not a reliable measure of productivity. More code does not necessarily equate to better software. Instead, focus on the quality and impact of the code produced.

• Commit Frequency: Tracking how often developers commit code can give a false sense of productivity. Frequent commits do not always indicate meaningful progress and can encourage developers to break down their work into smaller, less significant pieces.

• Bug Counts: Focusing on the number of bugs reported or fixed can create a negative environment where developers feel pressured to avoid complex tasks that may introduce bugs. This can stifle innovation and lead to a culture of risk aversion.

• Time Spent on Tasks: Measuring how long developers spend on specific tasks can be misleading. Developers may take longer on complex problems that require deep thinking and creativity, which are essential for high-quality software development.

Measuring developer productivity is fraught with challenges and dangers that engineering managers must navigate carefully. By understanding these complexities and avoiding outdated or superficial metrics, leaders can foster a more accurate and supportive environment for their development team productivity.

What is the impact of measuring Dev productivity on engineering culture?

Developer productivity improvements are a critical factor in the success of software development projects. As engineering managers or technology leaders, measuring and optimizing developer productivity is essential for driving development team productivity and delivering successful outcomes. However, measuring development productivity can have a significant impact on engineering culture & software engineering talent, which must be carefully navigated. Let's talk about measuring developer productivity while maintaining a healthy and productive engineering culture.

Measuring developer productivity presents unique challenges compared to other fields. The complexity of software development, inadequate traditional metrics, team dynamics, and lack of context can all lead to misguided incentives and decreased morale. It's crucial for engineering managers to understand these challenges to avoid the pitfalls of misinterpretation and ensure that developer productivity metrics genuinely reflect the contributions of developers.

Remember, the goal is not to maximize metrics but to create a development environment where software engineers can thrive and deliver maximum value to the organization.

Development teams using Typo experience a 30% improvement in Developer Productivity. Want to Try Typo?

‍

Wanna Improve your Dev Productivity?

Code review is all about improving the code quality. However, it can be a nightmare for developers when not done correctly. They may experience several code review challenges and slow down the entire development process. This further reduces their morale and efficiency and results in developer burnout.

Hence, optimizing the code review process is crucial for both code reviewers and developers. In this blog post, we have shared a few tips on optimizing code reviews to boost developer productivity.

Importance of Code Reviews

The Code review process is an essential stage in the software development life cycle. It has been a defining principle in agile methodologies. It ensures high-quality code and identifies potential issues or bugs before they are deployed into production.

Another notable benefit of code reviews is that it helps to maintain a continuous integration and delivery pipeline to ensure code changes are aligned with project requirements. It also ensures that the product meets the quality standards, contributing to the overall success of sprint or iteration.

With a consistent code review process, the development team can limit the risks of unnoticed mistakes and prevent a significant amount of tech debt.

They also make sure that the code meets the set acceptance criteria, and functional specifications and whether the code base follows consistent coding styles across the codebase.

Lastly, it provides an opportunity for developers to learn from each other and improve their coding skills which further helps in fostering continuous growth and helps raise the overall code quality.

How do Ineffective Code Reviews Decrease Developer Productivity?

Unclear Standards and Inconsistencies

When the code reviews lack clear guidelines or consistent criteria for evaluation, the developers may feel uncertain of what is expected from their end. This leads to ambiguity due to varied interpretations of code quality and style. It also takes a lot of their time to fix issues on different reviewers’ subjective opinions. This leads to frustration and decreased morale among developers.

Increase in Bottlenecks and Delays

When developers wait for feedback for an extended period, it prevents them from progressing. This slows down the entire software development lifecycle, resulting in missed deadlines and decreased morale. Hence, negatively affecting the deployment timeline, customer satisfaction, and overall business outcomes.

Low Quality and Delayed Feedback

When reviewers communicate vague, unclear, and delayed feedback, they usually miss out on critical information. This leads to context-switching for developers which makes them lose focus on their current tasks. Moreover, they need to refamiliarize themselves with the code when the review is completed. Hence, resulting in developers losing their productivity.

Increase Cognitive Load

Frequent switching between writing and reviewing code requires a lot of mental effort. This makes it harder for developers to be focused and productive. Poorly structured, conflicting, or unclear feedback also confuses developers on which of them to prioritize first and understand the rationale behind suggested changes. This slows down the progress, leading to decision fatigue and reducing the quality of work.

Knowledge Gaps and Lack of Context

Knowledge gaps usually arise when reviewers lack the necessary domain knowledge or context about specific parts of the codebase. This results in a lack of context which further misguides developers who may overlook important issues. They may also need extra time to justify their decision and educate reviewers.

How to Optimize Code Review Process to Improve Developer Productivity?

Set Clear Goals and Standards

Establish clear objectives, coding standards, and expectations for code reviews. Communicate in advance with developers such as how long reviews should take and who will review the code. This allows both reviewers and developers to focus their efforts on relevant issues and prevent their time being wasted on insignificant matters.

Use a Code Review Checklist

Code review checklists include a predetermined set of questions and rules that the team will follow during the code review process. A few of the necessary quality checks include:

• Readability and maintainability: This is the first criterion and cannot be overstated enough.

• Uniform formatting: Whether the code with consistent indentation, spacing, and naming convention easy to understand?

• Testing and quality assurance: Whether it have meticulous testing and quality assurance processes?

• Boundary testing: Are we exploring extreme scenarios and boundary conditions to identify hidden problems?

• Security and performance: Are we ensuring security and performance in our source code?

• Architectural integrity: Whether the code is scalable, sustainable, and has a solid architectural design?

Prioritize High-Impact Issues

The issues must be prioritized based on their severity and impact. Not every issue in the code review process is equally important. Take up those issues first which affect system performance, security, or major features. Review them more thoroughly rather than the ones that have smaller and less impactful changes. It helps in allocating time and resources effectively.

Encourage Constructive Feedback

Always share specific, honest, and actionable feedback with the developers. The feedback must point in the right direction and must explain the ‘why’ behind it. It will reduce follow-ups and give necessary context to the developers. This also helps the engineering team to improve their skills and produce better code which further results in a high-quality codebase.

Automate Wherever Possible

Use automation tools such as style check, syntax check, and static code analysis tools to speed up the review process. This allows for routine checks for style, syntax errors, potential bugs, and performance issues and reduces the manual effort needed on such tasks. Automation allows developers to focus on more complex issues and allocate time more effectively.

Keep Reviews Small and Focused

Break down code into smaller, manageable chunks. This will be less overwhelming and time-consuming. The code reviewers can concentrate on details, adhere to the style guide and coding standards, and identify potential bugs. This will allow them to provide meaningful feedback more effectively. This helps in a deeper understanding of the code’s impact on the overall project.

Recognize and Reward Good Work

Acknowledge and celebrate developers who consistently produce high-quality code. This enables developers to feel valued for their contributions, leading to increased engagement, job satisfaction, and a sense of ownership in the project’s success. They are also more likely to continue producing high-quality code and actively participate in the review process.

Encourage Pair Programming or Pre-Review

Encourage pair programming or pre-review sessions to by enabling real-time feedback, reducing review time, and improving code quality. This fosters collaboration, enhances knowledge sharing, and helps catch issues early. Hence, leading to smoother and more effective reviews. It also promotes team bonding, streamlines communication, and cultivates a culture of continuous learning and improvement.

Use a Software Engineering Analytics Platform

Using an Engineering analytics platform in an organization is a powerful way to optimize the code review process and improve developer productivity. It provides comprehensive insights into the code quality, technical debt, and bug frequency which allow teams to proactively identify bottlenecks and address issues in real time before they escalate. It also allow teams to monitor their practices continuously and make adjustments as needed.

Typo — Automated Code Review Tool

Typo’s automated code review tool identifies issues in your code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master. This means less time reviewing and more time for important tasks. It keeps your code error-free, making the whole process faster and smoother.

Key Features

• Supports top 8 languages including C++ and C#.

• Understands the context of the code and fixes issues accurately.

• Optimizes code efficiently.

• Provides automated debugging with detailed explanations.

• Standardizes code and reduces the risk of a security breach

‍

‍

‍

Learn More About Typo

Conclusion

If you prioritize the code review process, follow the above-mentioned tips. It will help in maximizing code quality, improve developer productivity, and streamline the development process.

Happy reviewing!

‍

In the crazy world of software development, getting developers to be productive is like finding the Holy Grail for tech companies. When developers hit their stride, turning out valuable work at breakneck speed, it’s a win for everyone. But let’s be honest—traditional productivity metrics, like counting lines of code or tracking hours spent fixing bugs, are about as helpful as a screen door on a submarine.

Say hello to the SPACE framework: your new go-to for cracking the code on developer productivity. This approach doesn’t just dip a toe in the water—it dives in headfirst to give you a clear, comprehensive view of how your team is doing. With the SPACE framework, you’ll ensure your developers aren’t just busy—they’re busy being awesome and delivering top-quality work on the dot. So buckle up, because we’re about to take your team’s productivity to the next level!

Introduction to the SPACE Framework

The SPACE framework is a modern approach to measuring developer productivity, introduced in a 2021 paper by experts from GitHub and Microsoft Research. This framework goes beyond traditional metrics to provide a more accurate and holistic view of productivity.

Nicole Forsgren, the lead author, emphasizes that measuring productivity by lines of code or speed can be misleading. The SPACE framework integrates several key metrics to give a complete picture of developer productivity.

Detailed Breakdown of SPACE Metrics

The five SPACE framework dimensions are:

Satisfaction and Well-being

When developers are happy and healthy, they tend to be more productive. If they enjoy their work and maintain a good work-life balance, they're more likely to produce high-quality results. On the other hand, dissatisfaction and burnout can severely hinder productivity. For example, a study by Haystack Analytics found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, 81% of software developers experienced burnout, which significantly impacted their productivity. The SPACE framework encourages regular surveys to gauge developer satisfaction and well-being, helping you address any issues promptly.

Performance

Traditional metrics often measure performance by the number of features added or bugs fixed. However, this approach can be problematic. According to the SPACE framework, performance should be evaluated based on outcomes rather than output. This means assessing whether the code reliably meets its intended purpose, the time taken to complete tasks, customer satisfaction, and code reliability.

Activity

Activity metrics are commonly used to gauge developer productivity because they are easy to quantify. However, they only provide a limited view. Developer Activity is the count of actions or outputs completed over time, such as coding new features or conducting code reviews. While useful, activity metrics alone cannot capture the full scope of productivity.

Nicole Forsgren points out that factors like overtime, inconsistent hours, and support systems also affect activity metrics. Therefore, it's essential to consider routine tasks like meetings, issue resolution, and brainstorming sessions when measuring activity.

Collaboration and Communication

Effective communication and collaboration are crucial for any development team's success. Poor communication can lead to project failures, as highlighted by 86% of employees in a study who cited ineffective communication as a major reason for business failures. The SPACE framework suggests measuring collaboration through metrics like the discoverability of documentation, integration speed, quality of work reviews, and network connections within the team.

Efficiency and Flow

Flow is a state of deep focus where developers can achieve high levels of productivity. Interruptions and distractions can break this flow, making it challenging to return to the task at hand. The SPACE framework recommends tracking metrics such as the frequency and timing of interruptions, the time spent in various workflow stages, and the ease with which developers maintain their flow.

Benefits of the SPACE Framework

The SPACE framework offers several advantages over traditional productivity metrics. By considering multiple dimensions, it provides a more nuanced view of developer productivity. This comprehensive approach helps avoid the pitfalls of single metrics, such as focusing solely on lines of code or closed tickets, which can lead to gaming the system.

Moreover, the SPACE framework allows you to measure both the quantity and quality of work, ensuring that developers deliver high-quality software efficiently. This integrated view helps organizations make informed decisions about team productivity and optimize their workflows for better outcomes.

‍

Implementing the SPACE Framework in Your Organization

Implementing the SPACE productivity framework effectively requires careful planning and execution. Below is a comprehensive plan and roadmap to guide you through the process. This detailed guide will help you tailor the SPACE framework to your organization's unique needs and ensure a smooth transition to this advanced productivity measurement approach.

Step 1: Understanding Your Current State

Objective: Establish a baseline by understanding your current productivity measurement practices and developer workflow.

1. Conduct a Productivity Audit
   • Review existing metrics and tools like Typo used for tracking productivity. 
   • Identify gaps and limitations in current measurement methods.
   • Gather feedback from developers and managers on existing practices.
2. Analyze Team Dynamics and Workflow
   • Map out your development process, identifying key stages and tasks.
   • Observe how teams collaborate, communicate, and handle interruptions.
   • Assess the overall satisfaction and well-being of your developers.

Outcome: A comprehensive report detailing your current productivity measurement practices, team dynamics, and workflow processes.

Step 2: Setting Goals and Objectives

Objective: Define clear goals and objectives for implementing the SPACE framework.

1. Identify Key Business Objectives
   • Align the goals of the SPACE framework with your company's strategic objectives.
   • Focus on improving areas such as time-to-market, code quality, customer satisfaction, and developer well-being.
2. Set Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART) Goals
   • Example Goals
     • Increase developer satisfaction by 20% within six months.
     • Reduce average bug resolution time by 30% over the next quarter.
     • Improve code review quality scores by 15% within the next year.

Outcome: A set of SMART goals that will guide the implementation of the SPACE framework.

Step 3: Selecting and Customizing SPACE Metrics

Objective: Choose the most relevant SPACE metrics and customize them to fit your organization's needs.

1. Review SPACE Metrics
   • Satisfaction and Well-being
   • Performance
   • Activity
   • Collaboration and Communication
   • Efficiency and Flow
2. Customize Metrics
   • Tailor each metric to align with your organization's specific context and objectives.
   • Example Customizations
     • Satisfaction and Well-being: Conduct quarterly surveys to measure job satisfaction and work-life balance.
     • Performance: Track the reliability of code and customer feedback on delivered features.
     • Activity: Measure the number of completed tasks, code commits, and other relevant activities.
     • Collaboration and Communication: Monitor the quality of code reviews and the speed of integrating work.
     • Efficiency and Flow: Track the frequency and duration of interruptions and the time spent in flow states.

Outcome: A customized set of SPACE metrics tailored to your organization's needs.

Step 4: Implementing Measurement Tools and Processes

Objective: Implement tools and processes to measure and track the selected SPACE metrics.

1. Choose Appropriate Tools
   • Use project management tools like Jira or Trello to track activity and performance metrics.
   • Implement collaboration tools such as Slack, Microsoft Teams, or Confluence to facilitate communication and knowledge sharing.
   • Utilize code review tools like CodeIQ by Typo to monitor the quality of code and collaboration.
2. Set Up Data Collection Processes
   • Establish processes for collecting and analyzing data for each metric.
   • Ensure that data collection is automated wherever possible to reduce manual effort and improve accuracy.
3. Train Your Team
   • Provide training sessions for developers and managers on using the new tools and understanding the SPACE metrics.
   • Encourage open communication and address any concerns or questions from the team.

Outcome: A fully implemented set of tools and processes for measuring and tracking SPACE metrics.

Step 5: Regular Monitoring and Review

Objective: Continuously monitor and review the metrics to ensure ongoing improvement.

1. Establish Regular Review Cycles
   • Conduct monthly or quarterly reviews of the SPACE metrics to track progress towards goals.
   • Hold team meetings to discuss the results, identify areas for improvement, and celebrate successes.
2. Analyze Trends and Patterns
   • Look for trends and patterns in the data to gain insights into team performance and productivity.
   • Use these insights to make informed decisions and adjustments to workflows and processes.
3. Solicit Feedback
   • Regularly gather feedback from developers and managers on the effectiveness of the SPACE framework.
   • Use this feedback to make continuous improvements to the framework and its implementation.

Outcome: A robust monitoring and review process that ensures the ongoing effectiveness of the SPACE framework.

Step 6: Continuous Improvement and Adaptation

Objective: Adapt and improve the SPACE framework based on feedback and evolving needs.

1. Iterate and Improve
   • Continuously refine and improve the SPACE metrics based on feedback and observed results.
   • Adapt the framework to address new challenges and opportunities as they arise.
2. Foster a Culture of Continuous Improvement
   • Encourage a culture of continuous improvement within your development teams.
   • Promote openness to change and a willingness to experiment with new ideas and approaches.
3. Share Success Stories
   • Share success stories and best practices with the broader organization to demonstrate the value of the SPACE framework.
   • Use these stories to inspire other teams and encourage the adoption of the framework across the organization.

Outcome: A dynamic and adaptable SPACE framework that evolves with your organization's needs.

‍

Conclusion

Implementing the SPACE framework is a strategic investment in your organization's productivity and success. By following this comprehensive plan and roadmap, you can effectively integrate the SPACE metrics into your development process, leading to improved performance, satisfaction, and overall productivity. Embrace the journey of continuous improvement and leverage the insights gained from the SPACE framework to unlock the full potential of your development teams.

‍

In today’s fast-paced software development world, understanding and improving developer productivity is more crucial than ever. One framework that has gained prominence for its comprehensive approach to measuring and enhancing productivity is the SPACE Framework. This framework, developed by industry experts and backed by extensive research, offers a multi-dimensional perspective on productivity that transcends traditional metrics.

This blog delves deep into the genesis of the SPACE Framework, its components, and how it can be effectively implemented to boost developer productivity. We’ll also explore real-world success stories of companies that have benefited from adopting this framework.

The genesis of the SPACE Framework

The SPACE Framework was introduced by researchers Nicole Forsgren, Margaret-Anne Storey, Chandra Maddila, Thomas Zimmermann, Brian Houck, and Jenna Butler. Their work was published in a paper titled “The SPACE of Developer Productivity: There’s More to it than You Think!” emphasising that a single metric cannot measure developer productivity. Instead, it should be viewed through multiple lenses to capture a holistic picture.

Components of the SPACE Framework

The SPACE Framework is an acronym that stands for:

1. Satisfaction and Well-being
2. Performance
3. Activity
4. Communication and Collaboration
5. Efficiency and Flow

Each component represents a critical aspect of developer productivity, ensuring a balanced approach to measurement and improvement.

Detailed breakdown of the SPACE Framework

1. Satisfaction and Well-being

Definition: This dimension focuses on how satisfied and happy developers are with their work and environment. It also considers their overall well-being, which includes factors like work-life balance, stress levels, and job fulfillment.

Why It Matters: Happy developers are more engaged, creative, and productive. Ensuring high satisfaction and well-being can reduce burnout and turnover, leading to a more stable and effective team.

Metrics to Consider:

• Employee satisfaction surveys
• Work-life balance scores
• Burnout indices
• Turnover rates

2. Performance

Definition: Performance measures the outcomes of developers’ work, including the quality and impact of the software they produce. This includes assessing code quality, deployment frequency, and the ability to meet user needs.

Why It Matters: High performance indicates that the team is delivering valuable software efficiently. It helps in maintaining a competitive edge and ensuring customer satisfaction.

Metrics to Consider:

• Code quality metrics (e.g., number of bugs, code review scores)
• Deployment frequency
• Customer satisfaction ratings
• Feature adoption rates

3. Activity

Definition: Activity tracks the actions developers take, such as the number of commits, code reviews, and feature development. This component focuses on the volume and types of activities rather than their outcomes.

Why It Matters: Monitoring activity helps understand workload distribution and identify potential bottlenecks or inefficiencies in the development process.

Metrics to Consider:

• Number of commits per developer
• Code review participation
• Task completion rates
• Meeting attendance

4. Communication and Collaboration

Definition: This dimension assesses how effectively developers interact with each other and with other stakeholders. It includes evaluating the quality of communication channels and collaboration tools used.

Why It Matters: Effective communication and collaboration are crucial for resolving issues quickly, sharing knowledge, and fostering a cohesive team environment. Poor communication can lead to misunderstandings and project delays.

Metrics to Consider:

• Frequency and quality of team meetings
• Use of collaboration tools (e.g., Slack, Jira)
• Cross-functional team interactions
• Feedback loops

5. Efficiency and Flow

Definition: Efficiency and flow measure how smoothly the development process operates, including how well developers can focus on their tasks without interruptions. It also looks at the efficiency of the processes and tools in place.

Why It Matters: High efficiency and flow indicate that developers can work without unnecessary disruptions, leading to higher productivity and job satisfaction. It also helps in identifying and eliminating waste in the process.

Metrics to Consider:

• Cycle time (time from task start to completion)
• Time spent in meetings vs. coding
• Context switching frequency
• Tool and process efficiency

Implementing the SPACE Framework in real life

Implementing the SPACE Framework requires a strategic approach, involving the following steps:

Establish baseline metrics

Before making any changes, establish baseline metrics for each SPACE component. Use existing tools and methods to gather initial data.

Actionable Steps:

• Conduct surveys to measure satisfaction and well-being.
• Use code quality tools to assess performance.
• Track activity through version control systems.
• Analyze communication patterns via collaboration tools.
• Measure efficiency and flow using project management software.

Set clear goals

Define what success looks like for each component of the SPACE Framework. Set achievable and measurable goals.

Actionable Steps:

• Increase employee satisfaction scores by 10% within six months.
• Reduce bug rates by 20% over the next quarter.
• Improve code review participation by 15%.
• Enhance cross-team communication frequency.
• Shorten cycle time by 25%.

Implement changes

Based on the goals set, implement changes to processes, tools, and practices. This may involve adopting new tools, changing workflows, or providing additional training.

Actionable Steps:

• Introduce well-being programs to improve satisfaction.
• Adopt automated testing tools to enhance performance.
• Encourage regular code reviews to boost activity.
• Use collaboration tools like Slack or Microsoft Teams to improve communication.
• Streamline processes to reduce context switching and improve flow.

Monitor and adjust

Regularly monitor the metrics to evaluate the impact of the changes. Be prepared to make adjustments as necessary to stay on track with your goals.

Actionable Steps:

• Use dashboards to track key metrics in real time.
• Hold regular review meetings to discuss progress.
• Gather feedback from developers to identify areas for improvement.
• Make iterative changes based on data and feedback.

Integrating the SPACE Framework with DORA Metrics

Real-world success stories

GitHub

GitHub implemented the SPACE Framework to enhance its developer productivity. By focusing on communication and collaboration, they improved their internal processes and tools, leading to a more cohesive and efficient development team. They introduced regular team-building activities and enhanced their internal communication tools, resulting in a 15% increase in developer satisfaction and a 20% reduction in project completion time.

Microsoft

Microsoft adopted the SPACE Framework across several development teams. They focused on improving efficiency and flow by reducing context switching and streamlining their development processes. This involved adopting continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) practices, which reduced cycle time by 30% and increased deployment frequency by 25%.

Key software engineering metrics mapped to the SPACE Framework

This table outlines key software engineering metrics mapped to the SPACE Framework, along with how they can be measured and implemented to improve developer productivity and overall team effectiveness.

What engineering leaders can do

Engineering leaders play a crucial role in the successful implementation of the SPACE Framework. Here are some actionable steps they can take:

Promote a culture of continuous improvement

Encourage a mindset of continuous improvement among the team. This involves being open to feedback and constantly seeking ways to enhance productivity and well-being.

Actionable Steps:

• Regularly solicit feedback from team members.
• Celebrate small wins and improvements.
• Provide opportunities for professional development and growth.

Invest in the right tools and processes

Ensure that developers have access to the tools and processes that enable them to work efficiently and effectively.

Actionable Steps:

• Conduct regular tool audits to ensure they meet current needs.
• Invest in training programs for new tools and technologies.
• Streamline processes to eliminate unnecessary steps and reduce bottlenecks.

Foster collaboration and communication

Create an environment where communication and collaboration are prioritized. This can lead to better problem-solving and more innovative solutions.

Actionable Steps:

• Organize regular team-building activities.
• Use collaboration tools to facilitate better communication.
• Encourage cross-functional projects to enhance team interaction.

Prioritize well-being and satisfaction

Recognize the importance of developer well-being and satisfaction. Implement programs and policies that support a healthy work-life balance.

Actionable Steps:

• Offer flexible working hours and remote work options.
• Provide access to mental health resources and support.
• Recognize and reward achievements and contributions.

Conclusion

The SPACE Framework offers a holistic and actionable approach to understanding and improving developer productivity. By focusing on satisfaction and well-being, performance, activity, communication and collaboration, and efficiency and flow, organizations can create a more productive and fulfilling work environment for their developers.

Implementing this framework requires a strategic approach, clear goal setting, and ongoing monitoring and adjustment. Real-world success stories from companies like GitHub and Microsoft demonstrate the potential benefits of adopting the SPACE Framework.

Engineering leaders have a pivotal role in driving this change. By promoting a culture of continuous improvement, investing in the right tools and processes, fostering collaboration and communication, and prioritizing well-being and satisfaction, they can significantly enhance developer productivity and overall team success.

In the software development industry, while user experience is an important aspect of the product life cycle, organizations are also considering Developer Experience.

A positive Developer Experience helps in delivering quality products and allows developers to be happy and healthy in the long run.

However, it is not always possible for organizations to measure and improve developer experience without any good tools and platforms.

What is Developer Experience?

Developer Experience is about the experience software developers have while working in the organization. It is the developers’ journey while working with a specific framework, programming languages, platform, documentation, general tools, and open-source solutions.

Positive Developer Experience = Happier teams

Developer Experience has a direct relationship with developer productivity. A positive experience results in high dev productivity, leading to high job satisfaction, performance, and morale. Hence, happier developer teams.

This starts with understanding the unique needs of developers and fostering a positive work culture for them.

Why Developer Experience is important?

Smooth onboarding process

Good DX ensures the onboarding process is as simple and smooth as possible. It includes making them familiar with the tools and culture and giving them the support they need to proceed further in their career. It also allows them to know other developers which helps in collaboration, open communication, and seeking help, whenever required.

Improves product quality

A positive Developer Experience leads to 3 effective C’s – Collaboration, communication, and coordination. Besides this, adhering to coding standards, best practices, and automated testing helps promote code quality and consistency and fix issues early.  As a result, development teams can easily create products that meet customer needs and are free from errors and glitches.  

Increases development speed

When Developer Experience is handled with care, software developers can work more smoothly and meet milestones efficiently. Access to well-defined tools, clear documents, streamlined workflow, and a well-configured development environment are few ways to boost development speed.  It also lets them minimize the need to switch between different tools and platforms which increases the focus and team productivity.

Attracts and retains top talents

Developers usually look out for a strong tech culture. So they can focus on their core skills and get acknowledged for their contributions. Great DX increases job satisfaction and aligns their values and goals with the organization. In return, developers bring the best to the table and want to stay in the organization for the long run.

Enhances collaboration

The right kind of Developer Experience encourages collaboration and effective communication tools. This fosters teamwork and reduces misunderstandings. Developers can easily discuss issues, share feedback, and work together on tasks. It helps streamline the development process and results in high-quality work.

Best developer experience tools

Time management tools

Clockwise

A powerful time management tool that streamlines and automates the calendar and protects developers’ flow time. It helps to strike a balance between meetings and coding time with a focus time feature.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with third-party applications such as Slack, Google Calendar, and Asana.
• Determines the most suitable meeting times for both developers and engineering leaders.
• Creates custom smart holds i.e. protected time throughout the hold.
• Reschedules the meetings that are marked as ‘Flexible’.
• Provides a quick summary of how much meetings and focus time was spent last week.

Toggle track

A straightforward time-tracking, reporting, and billing tool for software developers. It lets development teams view tracked team entries in a grid or calendar format.

Key features

• ‘Dashboard and Reporting’ feature offers in-depth analysis and lets engineering leaders create customized dashboards.
• Simple and easy-to-use interface.
• Preferable for those who avoid real-time tracking rather than track their time manually.
• Offers a PDF invoice template that can be downloaded easily.
• Includes optional Pomodoro setting that allows developers to take regular quick breaks.

Software development intelligence

Typo

Typo is an intelligent engineering management platform used for gaining visibility, removing blockers, and maximizing developer effectiveness. It gives a comparative view of each team’s performance across velocity, quality, and throughput. This tool can be integrated with the tech stack to deliver real-time insights. Git, Slack, Calenders, and CI/CD to name a few.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with third-party applications such as Git, Slack, Calenders, and CI/CD tools.
• ‘Sprint analysis’ feature allows for tracking and analyzing the team’s progress throughout a sprint.
• Offers customized DORA metrics and other engineering metrics that can be configured in a single dashboard.
• Offers engineering benchmark to compare the team’s results across industries.
• User-friendly interface.

Code intelligence tools

Sourcegraph (Cody)

An AI code-based assistant tool that provides code-specific information and helps in locating precise code based on natural language description, file names, or function names.

Key features

• Explain complex lines of code in simple language.
• Identifies bugs and errors in a codebase and provides suggestions.
• Offers documentation generation.
• Answers questions about existing code.
• Generates code snippets, fixes, and improves code.

GitHub Copilot

Developed by GitHub in collaboration with open AI, it uses an open AI codex for writing code quickly. It draws context from the code and suggests whole lines or complete functions that developers can accept, modify, or reject.

Key features

• Creates predictive lines of code from comments and existing patterns in the code.
• Generates code in multiple languages including Typescript, Javascript, Ruby, C++, and Python.
• Seamlessly integrates with popular editors such as Neovim, JetBrains IDEs, and Visual Studio.
• Create dictionaries of lookup data
• Writes test cases and code comments

Communication and collaboration

Slack

A widely used communication platform that enables developers to real-time communication and share files. It also allows team members to share and download files and create external links for people outside of the team.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with third-party applications such as Google Calendar, Hubspot, Clickup, and Salesforce.
• ‘Huddle’ feature that includes phone and video conferencing options.
• Accessible on both mobile and desktop (Application and browser).
• Offers ‘Channel’ feature i.e. similar to groups, team members can create projects, teams, and topics.
• Perfect for asynchronous communication and collaboration.

Project and task management

JIRA

A part of the Atlassian group, JIRA is an umbrella platform that includes JIRA software, JIRA core, and JIRA work management. It relies on the agile way of working and is purposely built for developers and engineers.

Key features

• Built for agile and scrum workflows.
• Offers Kanban view.
• JIRA dashboard helps users to plan projects, measure progress, and track due dates.
• Offers third-party integrations with other parts of Atlassian groups and third-party apps like Github, Gitlab, and Jenkins.
• Offers customizable workflow states and transitions for every issue type.

Linear

A project management and issue-tracking tool that is tailored for software development teams. It helps the team plan their projects and auto-close and auto-archive issues.

Key features

• Simple and straightforward UI.
• Easy to set up.
• Breaks larger tasks into smaller issues.
• Switches between list and board layout to view work from any angle.
• Quickly apply filters and operators to refine issue lists and create custom views.

Automated software testing

Lambda test

A cloud-based cross-browser testing platform that provides real-time testing on multiple devices and simulators. It is used to create and run both manual and automatic tests and functions via the Selenium Automation Grid.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with other testing frameworks and CI/CD tools.
• Offers detailed automated logs such as exception logs, command logs, and metadata.
• Runs parallel tests in multiple browsers and environments.
• Offers command screenshots and video recordings of the script execution.
• Facilitates responsive testing to ensure the application works well on various devices and screen sizes.

Postman

A widely used automation testing tool for API. It provides a streamlined process for standardizing API testing and monitoring it for usage and trend insights.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with CI/CD pipelines.
• Enable users to mimic real-world scenarios and assess API behavior under various conditions.
• Creates mock servers, and facilitates realistic simulations and comprehensive testing.
• Provides monitoring features to gain insights into API performance and usage trends.
• Friendly and easy-to-use interface equipped with code snippets.

Continuous integration/continuous deployment

Circle CI

Certified with FebRamp and SOC Type II compliant, It helps in achieving CI/CD in open-source and large-scale projects. Circle CI streamlines the DevOps process and automates builds across multiple environments.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with third-party applications with Bitbucket, GitHub, and GitHub Enterprise.  
• Tracks the status of projects and keeps tabs on build processes
• ‘Parallel testing’ feature helps in running tests in parallel across different executors.
• Allows a single process per project.
• Provides ways to troubleshoot problems and inspect things such as directory path, log files, and running processes

Documentation

Swimm

Specifically designed for software development teams. Swimm is an innovative cloud-based documentation tool that integrates continuous documentation into the development workflow.

Key features

• Seamlessly integrates with development tools such as GitHub, VSC, and JetBrains IDEs.
• ‘Auto-sync’ feature ensures the document stays up to date with changes in the codebase.
• Creates new documents, rewrites existing ones, or summarizes information.
• Creates tutorials and visualizations within the codebase for better understanding and onboarding new members.
• Analyzes the entire codebase, documentation sources, and data from enterprise tools.

Developer engagement

DevEx by Typo

A valuable tool for development teams that captures 360 views of developer experience and helps with early indicators of their well-being and actionable insights on the areas that need attention through signals from work patterns and continuous AI-driven pulse check-ins.

Key features

• Research-backed framework that captures parameters and uncovers real issues.
• In-depth insights are published on the dashboard.
• Combines data-driven insights with proactive monitoring and strategic intervention.
• Identifies the key priority areas affecting developer productivity and well-being.
• Sends automated alerts to identify burnout signs in developers at an early stage.

GetDX

A comprehensive insights platform that is founded by researchers behind the DORA and SPACE framework. It offers both qualitative and quantitative measures to give a holistic view of the organization.

Key features

• Provides a suite of tools that capture data from surveys and systems in real-time.
• Breaks down results based on personas.
• Streamlines developer onboarding with real-time insights.
• Contextualizes performance with 180,000+ industry benchmark samples.
• Uses advanced statistical analysis to identify the top opportunities.

Conclusion

Overall Developer Experience is crucial in today’s times. It facilitates effective collaboration within engineering teams, offers real-time feedback on workflow efficiency and early signs of burnout, and enables informed decision-making. By pinpointing areas for improvement, it cultivates a more productive and enjoyable work environment for developers.

There are various tools available in the market. We’ve curated the best Developer Experience tools for you. You can check other tools as well. Do your own research and see what fits right for you.

All the best!

The software development industry constantly evolves, and measuring developer productivity has become crucial to success. It is the key to achieving efficiency, quality, and innovation. However, measuring productivity is not a one-size-fits-all process. It requires a deep understanding of productivity in a development context and selecting the right metrics to reflect it accurately.

This guide will help you and your teams navigate the complexities of measuring dev productivity. It offers insights into the process’s nuances and equips teams with the knowledge and tools to optimize performance. By following the tips and best practices outlined in this guide, teams can improve their productivity and deliver better software.

What is Developer Productivity?

Development productivity extends far beyond the mere output of code. It encompasses a multifaceted spectrum of skills, behaviors, and conditions that contribute to the successful creation of software solutions. Technical proficiency, effective collaboration, clear communication, suitable tools, and a conducive work environment are all integral components of developer productivity. Recognizing and understanding these factors is fundamental to devising meaningful metrics and fostering a culture of continuous improvement.

Benefits of developer productivity

• Increased productivity allows developers to complete tasks more efficiently. It leads to shorter development cycles and quicker delivery of products or features to the market.

• Productivity developers can focus more on code quality, testing, and optimization, resulting in higher-quality software with fewer bugs and issues.

• Developers can accomplish more in less time, reducing development costs and improving the organization’s overall return on investment.

• Productive developers often experience less stress and frustration due to reduced workloads and smoother development processes that lead to higher job satisfaction and retention rates.

• With more time and energy available, developers can dedicate resources to innovation, continuous learning, experimenting with new technologies, and implementing creative solutions to complex problems.

Metrics for Measuring Developer Productivity

Measuring software developers’ productivity cannot be any arbitrary criteria. This is why there are several metrics in place that can be considered while measuring it. Here we can divide them into quantitative and qualitative metrics. Here is what they mean:

Quantitative Metrics

Lines of Code (LOC) Written

While counting lines of code isn’t a perfect measure of productivity, it can provide valuable insights into coding activity. A higher number of lines might suggest more work done, but it doesn’t necessarily equate to higher quality or efficiency. However, tracking LOC changes over time can help identify trends and patterns in development velocity. For instance, a sudden spike in LOC might indicate a burst of productivity or potentially code bloat, while a decline could signal optimization efforts or refactoring.

Time to Resolve Issues/Bugs

The swift resolution of issues and bugs is indicative of a team’s efficiency in problem-solving and code maintenance. Monitoring the time it takes to identify, address, and resolve issues provides valuable feedback on the team’s responsiveness and effectiveness. A shorter time to resolution suggests agility and proactive debugging practices, while prolonged resolution times may highlight bottlenecks in the development process or technical debt that needs addressing.

Number of Commits or Pull Requests

Active participation in version control systems, as evidenced by the number of commits or pull requests, reflects the level of engagement and contribution to the codebase. A higher number of commits or pull requests may signify active development and collaboration within the team. However, it’s essential to consider the quality, not just quantity, of commits and pull requests. A high volume of low-quality changes may indicate inefficiency or a lack of focus.

Code Churn

Code churn refers to the rate of change in a codebase over time. Monitoring code churn helps identify areas of instability or frequent modifications, which may require closer attention or refactoring. High code churn could indicate areas of the code that are particularly complex or prone to bugs, while low churn might suggest stability but could also indicate stagnation if accompanied by a lack of feature development or innovation. Furthermore, focusing on code changes allows teams to track progress and ensure that updates align with project goals while emphasizing quality code ensures that these changes maintain or improve the overall codebase integrity and performance.

Qualitative Metrics

Code Review Feedback

Effective code reviews are crucial for maintaining code quality and fostering a collaborative development environment in engineering org. Monitoring code review feedback, such as the frequency of comments, the depth of review, and the incorporation of feedback into subsequent iterations, provides insights into the team’s commitment to quality and continuous improvement. A culture of constructive feedback and iteration during code reviews indicates a quality-driven approach to development.

Team Satisfaction and Morale

High morale and job satisfaction among engineering teams are key indicators of a healthy and productive work environment. Happy and engaged teams tend to be more motivated, creative, and productive. Regularly measuring team satisfaction through surveys, feedback sessions, or one-on-one discussions helps identify areas for improvement and reinforces a positive culture that fosters teamwork, productivity, and collaboration.

Rate of Feature Delivery

Timely delivery of features is essential for meeting project deadlines and delivering value to stakeholders. Monitoring the rate of feature delivery, including the speed and predictability of feature releases, provides insights into the team’s ability to execute and deliver results efficiently. Consistently meeting or exceeding feature delivery targets indicates a well-functioning development process and effective project management practices.

Customer Satisfaction and Feedback

Ultimately, the success of development efforts is measured by the satisfaction of end-users. Monitoring customer satisfaction through feedback channels, such as surveys, reviews, and support tickets, provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of the software in delivering meaningful solutions. Positive feedback and high satisfaction scores indicate that the development team has successfully met user needs and delivered a product that adds value. Conversely, negative feedback or low satisfaction scores highlight areas for improvement and inform future development priorities.

Best Practices for Measuring Developer Productivity

While analyzing the metrics and measuring software developer productivity, here are some things you need to remember:

• Balance Quantitative and Qualitative Metrics: Combining both types of metrics provides a holistic view of productivity.

• Customize Metrics to Fit Team Dynamics: Tailor metrics to align with the development team’s unique objectives and working styles.

• Ensure Transparency and Clarity: Communicate clearly about the purpose and interpretation of metrics to foster trust and accountability.

• Iterate and Adapt Measurement Strategies: Continuously evaluate and refine measurement approaches based on feedback and evolving project requirements.

How does Generative AI Improve Developer Productivity?

Below are a few ways in which Generative AI can have a positive impact on developer productivity:

Focus on meaningful tasks: Generative AI tools take up tedious and repetitive tasks, allowing developers to give their time and energy to meaningful activities, resulting in productivity gains within the team members’ workflow.

Assist in their learning graph: Generative AI lets software engineers gain practical insights and examples from these AI tools and enhance team performance.

Assist in pair programming: Through Generative AI, developers can collaborate with other developers easily.

Increase the pace of software development: Generative AI helps in the continuous delivery of products and services and drives business strategy.

How does Typo Measure Developer Productivity?

There are many developer productivity tools available in the market for tech companies. One of the tools is Typo – the most comprehensive solution on the market.

Typo helps with early indicators of their well-being and actionable insights on the areas that need attention through signals from work patterns and continuous AI-driven pulse check-ins on the developer experience. It offers innovative features to streamline workflow processes, enhance collaboration, and boost overall productivity in engineering teams. It helps in measuring the overall team’s productivity while keeping individual’ strengths and weaknesses in mind.

Here are three ways in which Typo measures the team productivity:

Software Development Visibility

Typo provides complete visibility in software delivery. It helps development teams and engineering leaders to identify blockers in real time, predict delays, and maximize business impact. Moreover, it lets the team dive deep into key DORA metrics and understand how well they are performing across industry-wide benchmarks. Typo also enables them to get real-time predictive analysis of how time is performing, identify the best dev practices, and provide a comprehensive view across velocity, quality, and throughput.

Hence, empowering development teams to optimize their workflows, identify inefficiencies, and prioritize impactful tasks. This approach ensures that resources are utilized efficiently, resulting in enhanced productivity and better business outcomes.

‍

Code Quality Automation

Typo helps developers streamline the development process and enhance their productivity by identifying issues in your code and auto-fixing them before merging to master. This means less time reviewing and more time for important tasks hence, keeping code error-free, making the whole process faster and smoother. The platform also uses optimized practices and built-in methods spanning multiple languages. Besides this, it standardizes the code and enforces coding standards which reduces the risk of a security breach and boosts maintainability.

Since the platform automates repetitive tasks, it allows development teams to focus on high-quality work. Moreover, it accelerates the review process and facilitates faster iterations by providing timely feedback.  This offers insights into code quality trends and areas for improvement, fostering an engineering culture that supports learning and development.

Developer Experience

Typo helps with early indicators of developers’ well-being and actionable insights on the areas that need attention through signals from work patterns and continuous AI-driven pulse check-ins on the experience of the developers. It includes pulse surveys, built on a developer experience framework that triggers AI-driven pulse surveys.

Based on the responses to the pulse surveys over time, insights are published on the Typo dashboard. These insights help engineering managers analyze how developers feel at the workplace, what needs immediate attention, how many developers are at risk of burnout and much more.

Hence, by addressing these aspects, Typo’s holistic approach combines data-driven insights with proactive monitoring and strategic intervention to create a supportive and high-performing work environment. This leads to increased developer productivity and satisfaction.

‍

Track Developer Productivity Effectively

Measuring developers’ productivity is not straightforward, as it varies from person to person. It is a dynamic process that requires careful consideration and adaptability.

To achieve greater success in software development, the development teams must embrace the complexity of productivity, select appropriate metrics, use relevant tools, and develop a supportive work culture.

There are many developer productivity tools available in the market. Typo stands out to be the prevalent one. It’s important to remember that the journey toward productivity is an ongoing process, and each iteration presents new opportunities for growth and innovation.

‍

As technology rapidly advances, software engineering is becoming an increasingly fast-paced field where maximizing productivity is critical for staying competitive and driving innovation. Efficient resource allocation, streamlined processes, and effective teamwork are all essential components of engineering productivity. In this guide, we will delve into the significance of measuring and improving engineering productivity, explore key metrics, provide strategies for enhancement, and examine the consequences of neglecting productivity tracking.

What is Engineering Productivity?

Engineering productivity refers to the efficiency and effectiveness of engineering teams in producing work output within a specified timeframe while maintaining high-quality standards. It encompasses various factors such as resource utilization, task completion speed, deliverable quality, and overall team performance. Essentially, engineering productivity measures how well a team can translate inputs like time, effort, and resources into valuable outputs such as completed projects, software features, or innovative solutions.

Tracking software engineering productivity involves analyzing key metrics like productivity ratio, throughput, cycle time, and lead time. By assessing these metrics, engineering managers can pinpoint areas for improvement, make informed decisions, and implement strategies to optimize productivity and achieve project objectives. Ultimately, engineering productivity plays a critical role in ensuring the success and competitiveness of engineering projects and organizations in today’s fast-paced technological landscape.

Why does Engineering Productivity Matter?

Impact on Project Timelines and Deadlines

Engineering productivity directly affects project timelines and deadlines. When teams are productive, they can deliver projects on schedule, meeting client expectations and maintaining stakeholder satisfaction.

Influence on Product Quality and Customer Satisfaction

High productivity levels correlate with better product quality. By maximizing productivity, engineering teams can focus on thorough testing, debugging, and refining processes, ultimately leading to increased customer satisfaction.

Role in Resource Allocation and Cost-Effectiveness

Optimized engineering productivity ensures efficient resource allocation, reducing unnecessary expenditures and maximizing ROI. By utilizing resources effectively, tech companies can achieve their goals within budgetary constraints.

The Importance of Tracking Engineering Productivity

Insights for Performance Evaluation and Improvement

Tracking engineering productivity provides valuable insights into team performance. By analyzing productivity metrics, organizations can identify areas for improvement and implement targeted strategies for enhancement.

Facilitates Data-Driven Decision-Making

Data-driven decision-making is essential for optimizing engineering productivity. Organizations can make informed decisions about resource allocation, process optimization, and project prioritization by tracking relevant metrics.

Helps in Setting Realistic Goals and Expectations

Tracking productivity metrics allows organizations to set realistic goals and expectations. By understanding historical productivity data, teams can establish achievable targets and benchmarks for future projects.

Factors Affecting Engineering Productivity

Team Dynamics and Collaboration

Effective teamwork and collaboration are essential for maximizing engineering productivity. Organizations can leverage team members’ diverse skills and expertise to achieve common goals by fostering a collaboration and communication culture.

Work Environment and Organizational Culture

The work environment and organizational culture play a significant role in determining engineering productivity. A supportive and conducive work environment fosters team members’ creativity, innovation, and productivity.

Resource Allocation and Workload Management

Efficient resource allocation and workload management are critical for optimizing engineering productivity. By allocating resources effectively and balancing workload distribution, organizations can ensure that team members work on tasks that align with their skills and expertise.

Strategies to Improve Engineering Productivity

Identifying Productivity Roadblocks and Bottlenecks

Identifying and addressing productivity roadblocks and bottlenecks is essential for improving engineering productivity. By conducting thorough assessments of workflow processes, organizations can identify inefficiencies, focus on workload distribution, and implement targeted solutions for improvement.

Implementing Effective Tools and Practices for Optimization

Leveraging effective tools and best practices is crucial for optimizing engineering productivity. By adopting agile methodologies, DevOps practices, and automation tools, engineering organizations can streamline processes, reduce manual efforts, enhance code quality, and accelerate delivery timelines.

Prioritizing Tasks Strategically

Strategic task prioritization, along with effective time management and goal setting, is key to maximizing engineering productivity. By prioritizing tasks based on their impact and urgency, organizations can ensure that team members focus on the most critical activities, leading to improved productivity and efficiency.

Promoting Collaboration and Communication

Promoting collaboration and communication within engineering teams is essential for maximizing productivity. By fostering open communication channels, encouraging knowledge sharing, and facilitating cross-functional collaboration, organizations can leverage the collective expertise of team members to drive innovation, and motivation and achieve common goal setting.

Continuous Improvement through Feedback Loops and Iteration

Continuous improvement is essential for maintaining and enhancing engineering productivity. By soliciting feedback from team members, identifying areas for improvement, and iteratively refining processes, organizations can continuously optimize productivity, address technical debt, and adapt to changing requirements and challenges.

Consequences of Not Tracking Engineering Productivity

Risk of Missed Deadlines and Project Delays

Neglecting to track engineering productivity increases the risk of missed deadlines and project delays. Without accurate productivity tracking, organizations may struggle to identify and address issues that could impact project timelines and deliverables.

Decreased Product Quality and Customer Dissatisfaction

Poor engineering productivity can lead to decreased product quality and customer dissatisfaction. Organizations may overlook critical quality issues without effective productivity tracking, resulting in negative business outcomes, subpar products, and unsatisfied customers.

Inefficient Resource Allocation and Higher Costs

Failure to track engineering productivity can lead to inefficient resource allocation and higher costs. Without visibility into productivity metrics, organizations may allocate resources ineffectively, wasting time, effort, and budgetary overruns.

Best Practices for Engineering Productivity

Setting SMART Goals

Setting SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, time-bound) goals is essential for maximizing engineering productivity. By setting clear and achievable goals, organizations can focus their efforts on activities that drive meaningful results and contribute to overall project success.

Establishing a Culture of Accountability and Ownership

Establishing a culture of accountability and ownership is critical for maximizing engineering productivity. Organizations can foster a sense of ownership and commitment that drives productivity and excellence by empowering team members to take ownership of their work and be accountable for their actions.

Promoting Work-Life Balance

Ensure work-life balance at the organization by promoting policies that support flexible schedules, encouraging regular breaks, and providing opportunities for professional development and personal growth. This can help reduce stress and prevent burnout, leading to higher productivity and job satisfaction.

Embracing Automation and Technology

Embracing automation and technology is key to streamlining processes and accelerating delivery timelines. By leveraging automation tools, DevOps practices, and advanced technologies, organizations can automate repetitive tasks, reduce manual efforts, and improve overall productivity and efficiency.

Investing in Employee Training and Skill Development

Investing in employee training and skill development is essential for maintaining and enhancing engineering productivity. By providing ongoing training and development opportunities, organizations can equip team members with the skills and knowledge they need to excel in their roles and contribute to overall project success.

Using Typo for Improved Engineering Productivity

Typo offers innovative features to streamline workflow processes, enhance collaboration, and boost overall productivity in engineering teams. It includes engineering metrics that can help you take action with in-depth insights.

Understanding Engineering Productivity Metrics

Below are a few important engineering metrics that can help in measuring their productivity:

Merge Frequency

Merge Frequency represents the rate at which the Pull Requests are merged into any of the code branches per day. Engineering teams can optimize their development workflows, improve collaboration, and increase team efficiency.

‍

Cycle Time

Cycle time measures the time it takes to complete a single iteration of a process or task. Organizations can identify opportunities for process optimization and efficiency improvement by tracking cycle time.

‍

Deployment PR

Deployment PRs represent the average number of Pull Requests merged in the main/master/production branch per week. Measuring it helps improve Engineering teams’ efficiency by providing insights into code deployments’ frequency, timing, and success rate.

‍

Planning Accuracy

Planning Accuracy represents the percentage of Tasks Planned versus Tasks Completed within a given time frame. Its benchmarks help engineering teams measure their performance, identify improvement opportunities, and drive continuous enhancement of their planning processes and outcomes.

‍

Code Coverage

Code coverage is a measure that indicates the percentage of a codebase that is tested by automated tests. It helps ensure that the tests cover a significant portion of the code, identifying code quality, untested parts, and potential bugs.

‍

How does Typo Help in Enhancing Engineering Productivity?

Typo is an effective software engineering intelligence platform that offers SDLC visibility, developer insights, and workflow automation to build better programs faster. It can seamlessly integrate into tech tool stacks such as GIT versioning, issue tracker, and CI/CD tools. It also offers comprehensive insights into the deployment process through key metrics such as change failure rate, time to build, and deployment frequency. Moreover, its automated code tool helps identify issues in the code and auto-fixes them before you merge to master.

Features

• Offers customized DORA metrics and other engineering metrics that can be configured in a single dashboard.

• Includes effective sprint analysis feature that tracks and analyzes the team’s progress throughout a sprint.

• Provides 360 views of the developer experience i.e. captures qualitative insights and provides an in-depth view of the real issues.

• Offers engineering benchmark to compare the team’s results across industries.

• User-friendly interface.

Improve Engineering Productivity Always to Stay Ahead

Measuring and improving engineering productivity is essential for achieving project success and driving business growth. By understanding the importance of productivity tracking, leveraging relevant metrics, and implementing effective strategies, organizations can optimize productivity, enhance product quality, and deliver exceptional results in today’s competitive software engineering landscape.

In conclusion, engineering productivity is not just a metric; it’s a mindset and a continuous journey towards excellence.

A software development team is critical for business performance. They wear multiple hats to complete the work and deliver high-quality software to end-users. On the other hand, organizations need to take care of their well-being and measure developer experience to create a positive workplace for them.

Otherwise, this can negatively impact developers’ productivity and morale which makes their work less efficient and effective. As a result, disrupting the developer experience at the workplace.

With Typo, you can capture qualitative insights and get a 360 view of your developer experience. Let’s delve deeper into it in this blog post:

What is Developer Experience?

Developer experience refers to the overall experience of developer teams when using tools, platforms, and services to build software applications. This means right from the documentation to coding and deployment and includes tangible and intangible experience.

Happy developers = positive developer experience. It increases their productivity and morale. It further leads to a faster development cycle, developer workflow, methods, and working conditions.

Not taking care of developer experience can make it difficult for businesses to retain and attract top talent.

Why is Developer Experience Beneficial?

Developer experience isn’t just a buzzword. It is a crucial aspect of your team’s productivity and satisfaction.

Below are a few benefits of developer experience:

Smooth Onboarding Process

Good devex ensures the onboarding process is as simple and smooth as possible. It includes making engineering teams familiar with the tools and culture and giving them the support they need to proceed further in their career. It also allows them to know other developers which can help them in collaboration and mentorship.

Improves Product Quality

A positive developer experience leads to 3 effective C’s – Collaboration, communication, and coordination. Adhering to coding standards, best practices and automated testing also helps in promoting code quality and consistency and catching and fixing issues early. As a result, they can easily create products that meet customer needs and are free from errors and glitches.  

Increases Development Speed

When developer experience is handled carefully, team members can work more smoothly and meet milestones efficiently. Access to well-defined tools, clear documents, streamlined workflow, and a well-configured development environment are a few of the ways to boost development speed. It lets them minimize the need to switch between different tools and platforms which increases the focus and team productivity.

Attracts and Retains Top Talents

Developers usually look out for a strong tech culture so they can focus on their core skills and get acknowledged for their contributions. A good developer experience results in developer satisfaction and aligns their values and goals with the organization. In return, developers bring the best to the table and want to stay in the organization for the long run.

Enhances Collaboration

Great developer experience encourages collaboration and effective communication tools. This fosters teamwork and reduces misunderstandings. Through collaborative approaches, developers can easily discuss issues, share feedback, and work together on tasks.

How to Measure Developer Experience with Typo?

Typo helps with early indicators of their well-being and actionable insights on the areas that need attention through signals from work patterns and continuous AI-driven pulse check-ins on the experience of the developers.

Below is the process that Typo follows to gain insights into developer experience effectively:

Step 1: Pulse Surveys

Pulse surveys refer to short, periodic questionaries used to gather feedback from developers to assess their engagement, satisfaction, and overall organizational health.

Typo’s pulse surveys are specifically designed for the software engineering team as it is built on a developer experience framework. It triggers AI-driven pulse surveys where each developer receives a notification periodically with a few conversational questions.

We highly recommend doing surveys once a month as to keep a tab on your team’s wellbeing & experiences and build a continuous loop of feedback. However, you can customize the frequency of these surveys according to the company’s suitability and needs.

And don’t worry, these surveys are anonymous.

‍

‍

Step 2: Developer Experience Analytics

Based on the responses to the pulse surveys over time, insights are published on the Typo dashboard. These insights help to analyze how developers feel at the workplace, what needs immediate attention, how many developers are at risk of burnout and much more.

Below are key components of Typo’s developer experience analytics dashboard:

DevEx Score

The DevEx score indicates the overall state of well-being or happiness within an organization. It reflects the collective emotional and mental health of the developers.

Also known as the employee net promoter score, this score ranges between 1 – 10 as shown in the image below. It is based on the developer feedback collected. A high well-being score suggests that people are generally content and satisfied while a low score may indicate areas of concern or areas needing improvement.

Response Rate

It is the percentage of people who responded to the check-in. A higher response rate represents a more reliable dataset for analyzing developer experience metrics and deriving insights.

This is a percentage number along with the delta change. You will also see the exact count to drive this percentage.  It also includes the trend graph showing the data from the last 4 weeks.

It also includes trending sentiments that show you the segregation of employees based on the maximum re-occurring sentiments as mentioned by developer team.

‍

‍Recent comments

This section shows all the concerns raised by developers which you can reply to and drive meaningful conversations. This offers valuable insights into their workflow challenges, addresses issues promptly, and boosts developer satisfaction.

‍

Heatmap

In this section, you can slice and dice your data to deep-dive further on the level of different demographics. The list of demo graphies is as follows:

• Designation

• Location

• Team

• Tenure

Burnout Alerts

Typo sends automated alerts to your communication to help you identify burnout signs in developers at an early stage. This enables leaders to track developer engagement and support their well-being, maintain productivity, and create a positive and thriving work environment.

Typo tracks the work habits of developers across multiple activities, such as commits, PRs, reviews, comments, tasks, and merges, over a certain period. If these patterns consistently exceed the average of other developers or violate predefined benchmarks, the system identifies them as being in the burnout zone or at risk of burnout. These benchmarks can be customized to meet your specific needs.

Developer Experience Framework, Powered by Typo

Typo’s developer experience framework suggests to engineering leaders what they should focus on for measuring the dev productivity and experience.  

Below are the key focus areas and their drivers incorporated in the developer experience framework:

Key Focus Areas

Manager Support

It refers to the level of assistance, guidance, and resources provided by managers or team leads to support developers in their work.

Developer Flow

It is a state of optimal engagement and productivity that developers experience when fully immersed and focused on their work.

‍Product Management

The practices involved overseeing a software product’s lifecycle, from ideation to development, launch, and ongoing management.

Development Releases

It refers to creating and deploying software solutions or updates, emphasizing collaboration, streamlined workflows, and reliable deployment to enhance the developer experience.

Culture and Values

It includes shared beliefs, norms, and principles that shape a positive work environment. It includes collaboration, open communication, respect, innovation, diversity, and inclusion, fostering creativity, productivity, and satisfaction among developers.

Conclusion

Measuring developer experience continuously is crucial in today’s times. It helps to provide real-time feedback on workflow efficiency, early signs of burnout, and overall satisfaction levels. This further identifies areas for improvement and fosters a more productive and enjoyable work environment for developers.

To learn more about DevEx, visit our website!

Are you tired of feeling like you’re constantly playing catch-up with the latest AI tools, trying to figure out how they fit into your workflow? Many developers and managers share that sentiment, caught in a whirlwind of new technologies that promise efficiency but often lead to confusion and frustration.

The problem is clear: while AI offers exciting opportunities to streamline development processes, it can also amplify stress and uncertainty. Developers often struggle with feelings of inadequacy, worrying about how to keep up with rapidly changing demands. This pressure can stifle creativity, leading to burnout and a reluctance to embrace the innovations designed to enhance our work.

But there’s good news. By reframing your relationship with AI and implementing practical strategies, you can turn these challenges into opportunities for growth. In this blog, we’ll explore actionable insights and tools that will empower you to harness AI effectively, reclaim your productivity, and transform your software development journey in this new era.

The Current State of Developer Productivity

Recent industry reports reveal a striking gap between the available tools and the productivity levels many teams achieve. For instance, a survey by GitHub showed that 70% of developers believe repetitive tasks hamper their productivity. Moreover, over half of developers express a desire for tools that enhance their workflow without adding unnecessary complexity.

Understanding the Productivity Paradox

Despite investing heavily in AI, many teams find themselves in a productivity paradox. Research indicates that while AI can handle routine tasks, it can also introduce new complexities and pressures. Developers may feel overwhelmed by the sheer volume of tools at their disposal, leading to burnout. A 2023 report from McKinsey highlights that 60% of developers report higher stress levels due to the rapid pace of change.

Common Emotional Challenges

As we adapt to these changes, feelings of inadequacy and fear of obsolescence may surface. It’s normal to question our skills and relevance in a world where AI plays a growing role. Acknowledging these emotions is crucial for moving forward. For instance, it can be helpful to share your experiences with peers, fostering a sense of community and understanding.

Key Challenges Developers Face in the Age of AI

Understanding the key challenges developers face in the age of AI is essential for identifying effective strategies. This section outlines the evolving nature of job roles, the struggle to balance speed and quality, and the resistance to change that often hinders progress.

Evolving Job Roles

AI is redefining the responsibilities of developers. While automation handles repetitive tasks, new skills are required to manage and integrate AI tools effectively. For example, a developer accustomed to manual testing may need to learn how to work with automated testing frameworks like Selenium or Cypress. This shift can create skill gaps and adaptation challenges, particularly for those who have been in the field for several years.

Balancing speed and Quality

The demand for quick delivery without compromising quality is more pronounced than ever. Developers often feel torn between meeting tight deadlines and ensuring their work meets high standards. For instance, a team working on a critical software release may rush through testing phases, risking quality for speed. This balancing act can lead to technical debt, which compounds over time and creates more significant problems down the line.

Resistance to Change

Many developers hesitate to adopt AI tools, fearing that they may become obsolete. This resistance can hinder progress and prevent teams from fully leveraging the benefits that AI can provide. A common scenario is when a developer resists using an AI-driven code suggestion tool, preferring to rely on their coding instincts instead. Encouraging a mindset shift within teams can help them embrace AI as a supportive partner rather than a threat.

Strategies for Boosting Developer Productivity

To effectively navigate the challenges posed by AI, developers and managers can implement specific strategies that enhance productivity. This section outlines actionable steps and AI applications that can make a significant impact.

Embracing AI as a Collaborator

To enhance productivity, it’s essential to view AI as a collaborator rather than a competitor. Integrating AI tools into your workflow can automate repetitive tasks, freeing up your time for more complex problem-solving. For example, using tools like GitHub Copilot can help developers generate code snippets quickly, allowing them to focus on architecture and logic rather than boilerplate code.

• Recommended AI tools: Explore tools that integrate seamlessly with your existing workflow. Platforms like Jira for project management and Test.ai for automated testing can streamline your processes and reduce manual effort.

Actual AI Applications in Developer Productivity

AI offers several applications that can significantly boost developer productivity. Understanding these applications helps teams leverage AI effectively in their daily tasks.

• Code generation: AI can automate the creation of boilerplate code. For example, tools like Tabnine can suggest entire lines of code based on your existing codebase, speeding up the initial phases of development and allowing developers to focus on unique functionality.