What It Takes To Be A Great Technical Lead reminded me to write this long-brewing post; for a long time I’ve seen a false notion in corporate America that the hours you’re physically present at the office reflects your productivity and value. What should be measured is efficiency: productivity divided by time, where value comes from doing more in fewer hours.
In the industrial age, all those variables were fixed: the assembly line produced 4 cars an hour regardless of who worked on it, and more hours produced more cars at a constant rate. In the information age, production rates vary greatly from task to task and person to person. A rested software developer with the right tools and knowledge can produce 10 times more than an ill-equipped beginner burnt out on overtime. I saw this first hand at Code Camp; watching C# experts code with Reshaper is akin to watching Michael Phelps slice through the pool.
So why does corporate America cling to an outmoded metric of hours? Because it’s entrenched practice and easily measurable. Estimating and measuring information age tasks is difficult; even accepted agile methods have a fair bit of uncertainty. Still, wouldn’t you rather commit to delivering 5 feature points a week instead of a set 40+ hours? Once you find a way to control scope creep and rework from hastiness, it’d be a true performance incentive!
For another perspective, consider how professional photography is priced. A beginner might take an hour and a controlled studio to get a single good portrait; top professionals often get five minutes crammed into a back room with an uncooperative celebrity. Who do you think should command a higher price? And how often do you think any measure of hours factors into the negotiations?
If you want your business to be competitive, measure and reward the right thing: efficiency, not hours.
