Objective validation of successful management practices
Uing the Knowledge-centric Metrics
Related Articles
Summary
In a fast-evolving technological landscape, engineering managers face a significant challenge: objectively validating their management practices to foster continuous growth and success. This task, crucial to the professional performance and personal development of various roles within an organization, often proves daunting.
From Software Development Managers to CEOs and CTOs, to HR Managers, the lack of objective measures impacts decision-making, career progression, and strategic leadership. Current solutions, overly simplified into metrics of code quantity and speed, overlook a pivotal factor—the Developer Experience (DevEx), a determinant of productivity and happiness.
Addressing this intricate challenge is KEDEhub, offering a comprehensive solution that empowers leadership teams with data-driven insights to maximize software developer happiness and productivity. Leveraging our patented metric, Knowledge Discovery Efficiency (KEDE), KEDEhub provides an invaluable asset for any organization aspiring to harmonize management practices with developer satisfaction, ushering in a new era of productivity and business success. Welcome to the journey towards objective validation of management practices with KEDEhub.
The challenge
Despite their accomplishments, even the most successful engineering managers often find it challenging to objectively evaluate their management practices for sustained growth and success. This challenge arises not from their capabilities or intentions, but from the inherent difficulties of evaluating productivity and efficacy in the dynamic and multidimensional field of technology development.
Traditional productivity metrics, though useful, tend to be narrow and simplistic. They usually focus on quantifiable outputs like lines of code or tasks completed, often overlooking the human element, which is a critical part of software development. The Developer Experience (DevEx) - a composite of feedback loops, cognitive load, and flow state - has a substantial impact on productivity[1]. However, it isn't easily quantifiable or objectively assessed using conventional methods. As a result, managers can't solely rely on intuition or subjective feedback; they need objective and reliable measures that accurately reflect the current landscape.
Moreover, the inability to objectively validate their management practices can have far-reaching consequences beyond the workplace. A manager's professional reputation and career progression hinge on their ability to lead effective, productive teams. Without a method to objectively demonstrate their team's productivity, they might struggle with career growth and potentially miss valuable opportunities
On a personal level, the stress and frustration that comes from not being able to accurately validate and show to their bosses their team's productivity can spill over into managers' personal lives, leading to a poor work-life balance. This can strain their relationships with their families and may affect their overall well being
Therefore, the problem is not just about improving productivity within the workplace; it's about enabling managers to lead with confidence, enhance their career prospects, and enjoy a balanced, fulfilling life outside of work.
Who is affected?
The inability to objectively validate management practices impacts various key roles within an organization, each in a unique way. Here's how the challenges faced by successful managers affect these roles personally and professionally:
- Software Development Managers(Engineering Managers): They strive to maintain team productivity while ensuring a positive Developer Experience (DevEx), which can be hard to measure objectively. A manager's professional reputation and career progression hinge on their ability to lead effective, productive teams. Their professional success, personal well-being, and career progression are at stake.
- CEO and CTO: These executive leaders are responsible for the overall strategic direction of the company. They rely on accurate and objective reports from managers to make key decisions about resource allocation, strategic projects, and company policies. If they struggle to objectively validate their managers' practices, the quality of the information received by these executives may be compromised, leading to potentially less informed strategic decisions. This could, in turn, impact their effectiveness in their roles and their reputability in the eyes of stakeholders.
- HR Managers: They play a key role in talent management, employee engagement, and maintaining a positive work environment. Without clear insights into the effectiveness of management practices, they may struggle to implement effective strategies for talent retention and development. This can affect their effectiveness in their roles and the overall performance of their HR functions.
Inefficient or outdated management practices can lead to lower productivity, impacting the company's success and profitability. It could also affect the company's reputation in the industry and its ability to attract and retain top talent.
In summary, when managers struggle to objectively validate their management practices, it can affect the quality of decision-making, strategic planning, and personnel management across the organization, which can directly impact the professional success and reputation of these key roles.
Current Approach and its Limitations
Engineering leaders have long grappled with the complex task of measuring and enhancing developer productivity. Traditional approaches often reduce this intricate challenge to simplistic metrics of code quantity and task completion speed. These methods, while straightforward, do not consider an essential component - the Developer Experience (DevEx). DevEx encapsulates how developers feel, think about, and value their work, which significantly impacts their productivity and innovation potential.
These traditional measures could just as well be applied to manual labor, thereby overlooking what's unique about knowledge work - the acquisition and application of knowledge. Software development, at its core, is about knowledge discovery and application. The focus shouldn't solely be on the knowledge developers currently possess but rather on the knowledge they lack. It's the pursuit of this unknown that consumes time in developing software systems, a facet rarely considered in traditional productivity measurements.
Understanding that happier developers tend to be more productive and innovative is crucial, but this understanding needs to be operationalized. Executive leaders require objective data to make informed decisions about resource allocation, strategic projects, and company policies. They need a means to connect the Developer Experience to the economic productivity of the business. Only an approach that acknowledges and measures these factors can truly unlock the potential of software development teams.
The Solution
Quantifying developer happiness and productivity has long been a challenge due to the elusive nature of measurement. KEDEhub, with its patented technology, offers a comprehensive solution to this challenge. It empowers leadership teams with data-driven insights, aiming to maximize software developer happiness and productivity.
KEDEHub offers successful managers an opportunity to leverage scientific, data-driven insights for validating their effective management practices. It enables leaders to identify potential areas for refinement and aim for even greater success.
KEDEhub uses a scientifically backed, patented metric - Knowledge Discovery Efficiency, or KEDE. This unique measure assesses the capabilities of software development organizations, providing a robust tool for enhancing the efficacy of software development processes[2][3].
KEDE is a novel metric that proves instrumental in optimizing software development processes. It quantifies the knowledge gap developers encounter when embarking on tasks. This knowledge gap directly influences developers' experience, affecting their happiness, productivity, and overall satisfaction with their work.
KEDE is anchored to the natural constraints of maximum possible typing speed and the capacity of the cognitive control of the human brain. This association permits comparisons across varying contexts, programming languages, and applications.
KEDE is calculated for each developer individually and signifies the knowledge that they lacked before beginning the task. A low KEDE score implies that the developer did not possess the requisite knowledge to tackle the task, while a high KEDE score suggests that the developer was adequately prepared.
KEDE scores range between 0 and 100, with higher values signaling a better standing. For example, an expert developer tackling challenging requirements while also creating new knowledge when needed might receive a KEDE score of 20
KEDE serves as a unique and potent metric; however, it doesn't aim to supplant all other metrics. Instead, it operates akin to an organizational thermometer, mirroring the efficiency with which developers are able to garner and apply knowledge.
The thermometer can provide a reading of your organization's "temperature," but not diagnose the reason for a fever, so to speak. To understand the cause, organizations need a physician - someone who can delve inside the black box, like a manager or coach. Therefore, just like a physician is crucial for diagnosis and treatment, agile coaches and engineering managers are key for interpreting the readings and implementing beneficial changes.
Thus, KEDE quantifies happiness, cognitive load, levels of collaboration and productivity of software developers.
Example Applications
Validating time-saving benefits
Let's consider the case of Reddit's new 2021 M1 MacBook acquisition.
We recently found that the new 2021 M1 MacBooks cut our Android build times in half.
— Jameson (@softwarejameson) November 3, 2021
So for a team of 9, $32k of laptops will actually save $100k in productivity over 2022. The break-even point happens at 3 months.
TL;DR Engineering hours are much more expensive than laptops!
However, this raises a crucial question: How does a faster computer equate to increased productivity in knowledge work? Wouldn't the bottleneck for productivity be cognitive processes rather than build times? A faster computer might not reduce thinking time, but it could allow for more uninterrupted thinking periods.
The key advantage of faster builds is the allocation of larger, uninterrupted chunks of time. Considering that a significant Android app with numerous files and submodules at Zomato takes over 2 minutes for a build, this waiting time can lead developers to switch their focus, possibly to social media, often extending beyond the build time. Reducing the build time to 30 seconds or less decreases the frequency of such distractions.
From the details in the tweet, we can calculate the claimed time saved per developer per workday, as illustrated in the table below.
| Number of developers | 9 |
| Average hourly rate | $65.50 |
| Claimed savings | $100 000.00 |
| Work days in 2021 | 249 |
| Savings per work day | $401.61 |
| Saved hours/day | 6.13 |
| Saved hours/developer/day | 0.68 |
We estimate that the speeding up of the builds saved 0.68 hours or roughly 40 minutes per developer per work day.
This calculation suggests that speeding up the builds saves roughly 40 minutes per developer per workday. When we apply these 0.68 hours per developer per workday to the Efficiency Multiplier formula, it indicates an expected 9% improvement in the team's average KEDE.
One assumption here is that the saved 40 minutes per day are in one single uninterrupted time chunk, while in reality, they may be divided into smaller periods. However, short periods of around five minutes may not be sufficient for knowledge workers to ponder and process information effectively.
By comparing KEDE scores before and after investing in faster computers, management can objectively verify if the projected time savings have indeed been converted into productive time for the company.
Conclusion
In a competitive tech landscape, engineering managers face the challenge of objectively validating their practices. Traditional metrics, focusing merely on code quantity and speed, overlook the pivotal Developer Experience (DevEx). This oversight often impacts key organizational roles, from software development managers and executive leaders to HR managers.
KEDEhub presents a comprehensive solution to this challenge. By utilizing our patented metric, Knowledge Discovery Efficiency (KEDE), we offer data-driven insights to optimize software development processes, enhancing developer happiness and productivity. KEDEhub is a gateway to harmonizing management practices with developer satisfaction, enabling a new era of productivity and business success. The journey towards the objective validation of management practices begins with KEDEhub.
Appendix
"Objective confirmation", "objectively validate", and "objectively verify" are similar phrases used to evaluate or assess the effectiveness of management practices, but they do have nuanced differences:
- Objective Confirmation: This term usually refers to the initial recognition or acknowledgment that a certain management practice or procedure is in place and is being executed as planned. It involves checking that the practice exists and is being utilized, but it doesn't necessarily measure the effectiveness or impact of that practice.
- Objectively Validate: This implies a more rigorous evaluation process that not only checks for the existence and application of a management practice but also evaluates its effectiveness. Validation often involves comparing outcomes to defined objectives or expectations. It can involve analyzing data, reviewing results, and applying standards or metrics to measure how well the practice is achieving its intended goals.
- Objectively Verify: This term often implies an external or third-party examination of a management practice to ensure it's being applied correctly and is producing expected results. Verification usually involves an independent review or audit and may involve checking compliance with external standards or regulations. It provides a level of assurance that the practice has been implemented correctly and is functioning as intended.
While these are the typical interpretations of these terms, it's important to note that their precise meanings can vary depending on context, industry standards, and specific organizational definitions.
Works Cited
1. Abi Noda, Margaret-Anne Storey, Nicole Forsgren, and Michaela Greiler. 2023. DevEx: What Actually Drives Productivity: The developer-centric approach to measuring and improving productivity. Queue 21, 2, Pages 20 (March/April 2023), 19 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3595878
2. Bakardzhiev, D., & Vitanov, N. K. (2022). KEDE (KnowledgE Discovery Efficiency): a Measure for Quantification of the Productivity of Knowledge Workers. BGSIAM'22, p.5. Online: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=bibs&hl=en&cluster=1495338308600869852
3. Bakardzhiev, D. V. (2022). U.S. Patent No. 11,372,640. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Online: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?oi=bibs&hl=en&cluster=3749910716519444769
How to cite:
Bakardzhiev D.V. (2023) Objective validation of successful management practices: A practical guide using KEDE. https://docs.kedehub.io/kede-manage/kede-management-validation.html
Getting started
