• Clent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I understand the justification.

    I am not convinced.

    There is zero evidence that the team performs better or worse since at no point did Tim stop being Tim. There is no base line.

    If Tim had tried to pick up some points and the result was the rest of the team stumbling, that would be one thing. Tim didn’t, he kept doing his own thing because his team lead is afraid of Tim.

    Tim should be fired.

    • Bonehead@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Spoken like a true beaurocrat who only cares about the individual KPIs. If all you look at is the individual, you’ll miss the performance of the team.

      So you fire Tim. Great! He was a slacker who didn’t produce any story points. Now everyone is working individually. The other seniors don’t have time to help juniors because they have their own stories to work on. Gotta keep those stats up…don’t want to end up like Tim. The juniors start introducing bugs into the code accidentally. That’s not good, their stats are going to go down. Except the one that picks up the bug fixes, his stats look great! He’s sure to get a promotion doing nothing but fixing everyone else’s mistakes. Then the other juniors start catching on, and start pickup up their own bug fixes that they introduced. Now the juniors are spending about half their time fixing bugs they created, while seniors start looking like slackers because they don’t produce as many story points. Well something needs to be done about that, because you don’t want to end up like Tim…

      Any points system can be gamed. If all you look at are the numbers, you’ll miss how the team really works.

      • Clent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        A beaurocart? Just going to make shit up about me to fit your head cannon?

        I never said any of the shit you claimed.

        • Bonehead@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          If Tim had tried to pick up some points and the result was the rest of the team stumbling, that would be one thing. Tim didn’t, he kept doing his own thing because his team lead is afraid of Tim.

          Tim should be fired.

          In either case, all that matters is whether Tim produced story points or that rest of the team produced enough story points, and that Tim should be fired for not doing that. I’m literally just using you’re own words…

    • pachrist@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I disagree.

      If the story is true, Tim coaches the new hires and on boards them into the environment. Tim serves as a sound board for the senior techs, since he’s privy to the larger departmental scope. He is the point of contact for the team.

      The manager telling the story needs to be fired. Tim is doing his job.

      The manager here only serves to add a layer between Tim and management that is ultimately unnecessary, as the story proves.

      Fire the manager. Promote Tim.

      • Clent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whoever is “protecting” Tim should be replaced by Tim.

        Tim doesn’t want to code, that’s fine. Not everyone is cut out to be an individual contributor.

        But he is not a senior developer, he is a team lead or a team mentor. He has the wrong title.

    • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What evidence do one needs other than the opinion of their teammates and lead?

      No one should drop players from a team due to statistics. Otherwise you’d have a non functional team of cheap wannabe-Ronaldos unable to function. Which is the reason kpi based approach fails

      • Clent@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I literally said what evidence could be collected.

        its hilarious how we spend our careers developing complex algorithms, reducing concepts into math and then delude ourselves into thinking the only algorithm that cannot be written is one that evaluates our own performance.

        • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Because it cannot be mathematically developed. KPIs as class of algorithm are linear dimensional reductions from a complex hyperspace to a small, arbitrary reference system built on non orthogonal axes, aimed to capture non periodic, non stationary phenomena (i.e. that unpredictably evolve over time).

          Mathematically, performance kpi do not make much sense for most jobs, unless the job is so straightforward that the hyperspace has such low complexity that KPIs are meaningful representation. Not even a call center job has such mathematical characteristics…

          As a task, AGI is mathematically much simpler task.

          However performance kpis are the only thing many have to judge, as they lack technical and personal skills to do otherwise. It’s a tradeoff, but we must recognize that kpi are oversimplifications with extreme loss of information, many time useless

          • Clent@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s quite a lengthy response for the time between my post and your write up.

            Not sure if you’re a bot or just used one to form your thoughts.

            • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I am a human, who happened to be browsing lemmy when you answered, and work in ML and with a background in algorithms and HPC. It happened to be a lucky coincidence

              • Clent@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Ok, so you’re not a software engineer. That’s good to know.

                I did not say it has to be kpi on whatever other jargon you want to throw at it.

                Software engineers slogan is: enough time and motivation .

                Except when it comes to evaluating ourselves then it’s just not possible.

                How can that be?

                The bullshit excuses we tell ourselves is how we’ve ended up with ridiculous interview cycles with take home test.