Using quantitative measurements to track developers is great. But not when done stupidly. Using only one measurement is dumb (ie, # of bugs alone, or lines of code, or number of checkins). And removing human participation is dumb too. You're a manager, not a spreadsheet.
But, using quantitative measurements along with human feedback, peer review, and other traditional measurements gives you an early warning setup, and a better way of tracking changes in behavior.
This then allows you to have discussions with an employee like "I'd like you to be more productive, it feels like you've been slacking a bit recently". Then, you have both visual clues (they're at the desk, not with HN open), and also graphical clues (hmm, your story points completed per week went up 10%, awesome).
It's another tool. Don't confuse it with the only tool.
Using quantitative measurements to track developers is great. But not when done stupidly. Using only one measurement is dumb (ie, # of bugs alone, or lines of code, or number of checkins). And removing human participation is dumb too. You're a manager, not a spreadsheet.
But, using quantitative measurements along with human feedback, peer review, and other traditional measurements gives you an early warning setup, and a better way of tracking changes in behavior.
This then allows you to have discussions with an employee like "I'd like you to be more productive, it feels like you've been slacking a bit recently". Then, you have both visual clues (they're at the desk, not with HN open), and also graphical clues (hmm, your story points completed per week went up 10%, awesome).
It's another tool. Don't confuse it with the only tool.