
# Managing Underperforming Engineers with Empathy

Every team, at some point, faces an engineer who is struggling—whether it's missed deadlines, declining code quality, or disengagement. It’s easy to feel frustrated, especially in a fast-moving environment where every delay matters. But instead of jumping to conclusions, the best leaders take a step back and ask: What’s really going on here? When leaders take time to understand an engineer’s struggles, they’re not just helping one person—they’re building a stronger, more resilient team that delivers better software.

## Understanding the Root Causes

Before making assumptions, the first step is to understand *why* an engineer is struggling. Underperformance is rarely due to laziness or lack of care. Common causes include:

- **Lack of Clarity** – Unclear expectations, vague project goals, or ambiguous requirements can lead to confusion and slow progress.
- **Skill Gaps** – They might be missing crucial technical skills or struggling with a new tech stack.
- **Personal Challenges** – Life outside of work matters. Health issues, family problems, or burnout can severely impact productivity.
- **Lack of Motivation** – Boredom, disengagement, or lack of ownership can make work feel meaningless.
- **Team Dynamics** – Misalignment with team culture, conflicts, or lack of support from peers can contribute to underperformance.

## The Impact on Software Engineering

Unchecked underperformance can have long-term effects—technical debt may accumulate, team morale can suffer, and deadlines may slip over time. While strong teams often absorb short-term struggles, persistent issues eventually create bottlenecks that slow progress. Instead of letting problems compound, leaders who take an empathetic and proactive approach don’t just help one engineer—they strengthen the entire team. A culture of support and accountability reduces bottlenecks, fosters innovation, and strengthens team ownership.

## Practical Steps to Address Underperformance

### 1. **Start with a Conversation, Not a Confrontation**

Schedule a one-on-one conversation in a low-pressure setting. Approach the discussion with curiosity rather than criticism.

- Use open-ended questions: *"How are you feeling about your work lately?"* or *"Is there anything getting in the way of your productivity?"*
- Avoid blaming language. Instead of *"You're not meeting expectations,"* try *"I’ve noticed some challenges—how can we work through them together?"*
- Show that you care: *"I want to support you in growing and succeeding here."*

#### *Example Scenario:*

Sarah, a backend engineer, was recently assigned to a project using a new database technology. She was missing deadlines and struggling with implementation, finding it difficult to adapt to the unfamiliar tech stack. Instead of assuming she was slacking off, her manager scheduled a casual check-in to better understand her challenges. Together, they identified key areas for improvement and developed a structured learning plan. This included pairing with a senior engineer, reviewing relevant training materials, and working on a small internal project to build confidence with the new technology.

### 2. **Clarify Expectations and Provide Context**

Misaligned expectations can create a cycle of frustration. Clearly define:

- What success looks like for their role.
- How their work impacts the team and company.
- Where improvement is needed with specific, constructive feedback.

Instead of saying, *"Your code quality is bad,"* try *"I've noticed some readability issues in your recent PRs—let’s pair on refactoring strategies."*

### 3. **Offer Support and Resources**

If underperformance stems from skill gaps, provide opportunities for targeted growth:

- **Pair Programming & Code Reviews** – Foster a learning culture by pairing with them on tasks.
- **Training & Courses** – Recommend online courses, books, or internal learning resources.
- **Mentorship** – Connect them with a more experienced engineer.

### 4. **Adjust Work Assignments (If Necessary)**

Not every engineer thrives in the same type of work. If possible, explore different areas where they might excel:

- Are they better at backend vs. frontend?
- Would they thrive in a different project phase (design, testing, debugging)?
- Could they take on a mentorship role for junior engineers?

Engineers have different strengths—some may find UI challenging but thrive in debugging, while others excel in backend development over frontend work. If business needs allow, adjusting assignments to match strengths can improve both team performance and individual confidence.

### 5. **Provide Regular Feedback & Check-Ins**

Improvement takes time. Follow up with:

- Weekly or biweekly check-ins to track progress.
- Encouragement for small wins.
- Adjustments based on their feedback and performance.

Keeping an open dialogue ensures performance discussions remain part of an ongoing development process rather than one-off interventions. This approach ensures that feedback is part of a continuous improvement cycle, fostering long-term growth.

### 6. **Encourage a Growth Mindset**

Some engineers fear failure and avoid challenges. Reinforce that mistakes are part of the learning process. Celebrate effort and progress, not just final outcomes.

"Last sprint was tough, but I saw how much effort you put into improving your debugging skills. That’s real growth."

Encouraging engineers to document and share their learnings strengthens a culture of continuous growth and knowledge-sharing.

### 7. **Know When to Escalate**

Some engineers will continue to struggle despite coaching and adjustments. When that happens, escalation isn’t about punishment—it’s about providing structure and accountability.

#### **Signs That Escalation May Be Necessary:**

How do you know when it’s time to escalate? Watch for these warning signs:

- If **performance issues persist** even after multiple feedback cycles and support efforts, it’s a signal that more structured intervention is needed.

- If an engineer **avoids ownership or doesn’t follow through** on agreed-upon improvements, their lack of engagement might be holding them back.

- If their **underperformance is affecting the team**, with others compensating for their work or deadlines slipping, it’s time to step in.

- If they’re **resistant to feedback, avoid collaboration, or negatively impact team morale**, behavioral concerns may be at play.

At this point, the usual coaching efforts aren’t working, and the team is feeling the impact. Before considering next steps, a structured intervention like a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) can help set clear goals and ensure fair expectations for improvement.

#### *Example Scenario:*

Mark, a mid-level engineer, had been struggling with debugging complex issues and repeatedly introduced regressions in production code over several months. Despite coaching, training, and targeted feedback, Mark continued to struggle with debugging and regressions, affecting team velocity. Despite multiple coaching attempts, Mark’s challenges persisted, affecting team progress. Recognizing that coaching efforts had not led to sufficient improvement, his manager implemented a **Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)** to provide structured guidance and clear expectations. His manager worked with him to set clear milestones, including fixing three high-priority bugs within a sprint, improving unit test coverage on a critical module, and presenting a short technical review to the team to demonstrate deeper understanding.

To support him, his manager scheduled weekly check-ins to review progress, assigned a mentor to guide him through debugging strategies, and provided targeted feedback on his code submissions with clear expectations for improvement. After two months, Mark showed improvement. His debugging became more reliable, he engaged more in code reviews, and he successfully completed a key project milestone. While he still had areas to develop, the structured support helped him regain confidence and contribute more effectively. And though not all PIPs lead to long-term success, this process gave him a fair chance to grow—and helped clarify whether he was the right fit for the team’s needs.

A PIP isn’t always successful. It’s a structured approach when other coaching efforts haven’t worked. If mishandled, it may feel like a termination step rather than a growth opportunity. But when structured well, it provides clarity, support, and a fair chance for an engineer to improve. Setting up a PIP correctly is key to making it constructive. Here’s how to ensure it remains a supportive and effective process:

#### *Best Practices for PIPs:*

- Set **realistic** and **measurable** improvement goals.
- Offer **continuous support** during the process.
- Keep **communication open and constructive**.
- Work with HR (if applicable) to ensure the PIP aligns with company policies and is documented appropriately. If performance doesn’t improve, document steps transparently and explore alternative solutions, such as internal transfers or career coaching.

## Conclusion

Great teams don’t just write code—they cultivate a culture of trust, accountability, and support where engineers can thrive. Addressing underperformance with empathy isn’t about lowering the bar; it’s about providing the right support and accountability so engineers can succeed.

Every engineer will face challenges, and how we respond shapes their growth. Helping someone improve takes effort, but it’s one of the most fulfilling aspects of leadership. What have you learned from these situations?

Empathy isn’t just a leadership trait—it’s a skill that builds stronger teams, better code, and healthier workplaces. Leading with empathy makes teams more resilient, innovative, and better equipped to handle challenges. And great teams don’t just build software—they shape the future of engineering.



Managing Underperforming Engineers with Empathy


## **Making Technical vs. Business Trade-Offs as a Tech Lead**

### **Introduction: The Tech Lead’s Dilemma**

You're leading a critical project, and your engineers want a full system refactor for scalability. Meanwhile, the business team needs a new feature next quarter to meet revenue goals. What’s your move?

Tech leads constantly juggle technical excellence and business priorities. Choosing between scalability and time-to-market, long-term maintainability and short-term deliverables—these trade-offs define your leadership. Get them right, and you enable sustainable growth. Get them wrong, and you risk accumulating tech debt or slowing down innovation.

Balancing technical and business needs is tricky. Here’s how to make trade-offs without compromising either side.

## 1. Understanding the Nature of Trade-Offs

As a tech lead, you're constantly balancing competing priorities. Engineers often push for technical excellence—clean architecture, scalability, and minimal tech debt—while business stakeholders focus on revenue growth, customer acquisition, and speed to market. Finding a middle ground that satisfies both is a critical skill.

### Technical Excellence vs. Business Value

A well-structured system ensures long-term stability and reduces risks, but businesses focus on delivering features and innovation quickly. The challenge is making decisions that balance both sustainability and immediate value.

Your team wants to refactor a core module for better scalability, but leadership prioritises a feature launch next quarter. Do you push back, find a compromise, or explore an alternative?

### Common Trade-Off Scenarios

Trade-offs are inevitable in leadership, and while there's no perfect answer, understanding common dilemmas can help guide better decisions. Let's break down a few key scenarios:

- **Speed vs. Quality:** Shipping an MVP quickly might secure market share but could introduce long-term maintainability issues. Consider a scenario where a startup hurried a feature launch to meet an investor deadline. While it gained initial traction, the rushed implementation later required months of performance optimizations to stabilize the product.
- **Tech Debt vs. Feature Delivery:** Prioritizing feature delivery keeps stakeholders happy, but neglecting tech debt can slow down future development. Many SaaS teams tackle tech debt by setting aside part of each sprint for refactoring, striking a balance between long-term stability and ongoing feature development.
- **Custom vs. Off-the-Shelf Solutions:** While building an in-house authentication system provides flexibility, it also demands ongoing maintenance. E-commerce teams often face the dilemma of building an authentication system in-house or using a third-party provider. Opting for an external solution can accelerate development, allowing engineers to focus on core product enhancements instead.
- **Innovation vs. Stability:** Adopting a cutting-edge framework may give a competitive advantage but can also increase risks. Tech leaders often face the challenge of balancing innovation with stability. A fintech team considering modernization might explore a cutting-edge database technology, only to later pivot back to a more stable solution after encountering unforeseen scalability challenges.

Each scenario requires balancing short-term gains against long-term risks.

---

## 2. A Framework for Decision-Making

### Step 1: Define the Trade-Off Clearly

Step back and assess the bigger picture. Ask:

- What is the business impact of choosing one option over another?
- What are the technical risks involved?
- How will this decision affect customers, engineers, and stakeholders?

### Step 2: Align with Business Objectives

Every technical decision should be framed in terms of business outcomes. Consider:

- Revenue impact: Will this choice directly affect sales or user retention?
- Customer experience: Will it enhance or degrade the user journey?
- Operational efficiency: Will it reduce costs or streamline processes?

### Step 3: Consider the Long-Term Consequences

Steer clear of quick fixes that create long-term issues.

- Is this a temporary compromise or a long-term liability?
- Can we incrementally improve the situation over time?
- What is the cost of reversing this decision if needed?

### Step 4: Use Data to Support Your Choice

*While this article focuses on a general approach to balancing technical and business trade-offs, structured prioritisation frameworks like* **RICE (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort)** *or* **MoSCoW (Must-have, Should-have, Could-have, Won't-have)** *can further refine decision-making. These frameworks provide a structured way to evaluate competing priorities.*

While this article focuses on a general approach to balancing technical and business trade-offs, structured prioritization frameworks like **RICE (Reach, Impact, Confidence, Effort)** or **MoSCoW (Must-have, Should-have, Could-have, Won't-have)** can further refine decision-making. These frameworks provide a structured way to evaluate competing priorities.

Whenever possible, quantify the trade-off:

- **Time to deliver** – Assess required effort.
- **Cost analysis** – Identify budget implications.
- **Performance impact** – Measure effects on uptime, latency, and security.

### Step 5: Communicate the Decision Effectively

Technical teams and business stakeholders speak different languages. Bridge the gap by:

- Using visuals or analogies to explain complex concepts.
- Presenting pros and cons in simple terms.
- Recommending a measured approach rather than an extreme position.

## 3. Illustrative Scenarios

### Balancing Tech Debt vs. Features

A fintech team faces a common dilemma: Should they refactor an aging payments system to improve long-term stability, or prioritize launching a feature requested by a major client?

To balance both needs, the team allocates 30% of their sprint to refactoring while dedicating the rest to feature development, ensuring that they meet business goals without neglecting technical debt.

This approach allows them to meet deadlines while steadily improving system stability, ensuring long-term scalability.

### The Build vs. Buy Dilemma

A startup is debating whether to build a real-time analytics dashboard from scratch or leverage an existing third-party SaaS tool to go to market faster.

They decide to integrate a third-party solution first, planning to develop a custom version if customer demand justifies the investment.

This decision enables them to validate market needs quickly while conserving engineering resources for critical product improvements.

## 4. Practical Tips for Tech Leads

Leading a tech team means making tough calls. Picture this: you're at a fast-growing startup where the CEO pressures you to deliver new features rapidly, while your engineers warn about accumulating tech debt. How do you balance these competing demands? Here are some strategies to help:

### 1. Develop Business Acumen

Great tech leads do more than write good code—they understand how their company makes money. Knowing how revenue flows, what customers need, and where the company is headed makes every technical decision smarter. Engage with product managers, sales teams, and executives to see the bigger picture.

Many tech leads align engineering with business priorities by regularly attending product meetings, fostering trust and ensuring their team's work contributes directly to company growth.

### 2. Foster a Culture of Pragmatism

Encourage engineers to think about business impact, not just technical perfection. Having a clear process to assess tech debt versus feature work keeps teams focused on the right priorities.

A practical approach some teams take is setting aside a 'tech debt budget,' ensuring long-term stability while still delivering new features.

### 3. Manage Stakeholder Expectations

Clear communication is key when discussing trade-offs. Be transparent about risks, offer alternative solutions, and keep leadership informed about decisions and their impact.

Some fintech teams opt for phased rollouts when tackling major refactors, helping to minimize downtime while steadily improving system performance—keeping both executives and engineers aligned.

### 4. Prioritize Developer Productivity

Balancing innovation with stability ensures that engineers have time for both. Investing in tooling and automation can reduce unnecessary complexity and speed up workflows.

Deployment delays can slow down innovation, prompting teams to adopt CI/CD automation. This shift often reduces release cycles from weeks to hours, enabling engineers to concentrate on developing new product features instead of resolving operational bottlenecks.

Applying these strategies helps tech leads balance business and technical priorities while keeping teams motivated and productive.

## Conclusion: Balancing Act of a Tech Lead

**Technical vs. business trade-offs aren’t about picking a side.** It’s about finding that balance between great engineering and what moves the business forward. As a tech lead, your success depends on:

- Understanding both technical and business priorities.
- Making data-driven, strategic decisions.
- Communicating trade-offs clearly and persuasively.

Making the right trade-off means ensuring both technical and business goals are met sustainably.

Making Technical vs. Business Trade-Offs as a Tech Lead


# The Art of Delegation: How to Let Go as a New Tech Lead

Stepping into a tech lead role for the first time is a shift unlike any other in your engineering career. You’ve spent years honing your coding skills, debugging tricky issues, and optimizing performance. But now, success isn’t measured by how much code you write—it’s measured by how well your team delivers.

And that means learning to **let go**.

Delegation is one of the hardest skills for new tech leads to master. You might think, “I can do it faster myself” or “I don’t want to burden my team”—but clinging to every task will burn you out and slow your team down. More importantly, failing to delegate can stifle your engineers' growth, making them overly reliant on you.

So how do you delegate effectively—and why is it one of the most valuable skills you’ll develop as a tech lead? Let’s break it down.

## Why Delegation Is Critical in Engineering

Many tech leads hesitate to delegate, often without realizing the full impact. When responsibilities pile up on one person, deadlines become harder to meet, teams miss opportunities to grow, and burnout becomes a real risk. Effective delegation isn’t about offloading work—it’s about enabling your team to contribute, develop new skills, and take ownership of their work.

Effective delegation doesn’t just lighten your workload—it strengthens your team, improves software quality, and enhances long-term growth. Without it, you risk slowing your team down and becoming a bottleneck.

### 1. **It Scales Your Impact**

If you try to do everything yourself, you become a bottleneck. When you delegate properly, your influence multiplies because your team can accomplish more in parallel.

### 2. **It Develops Your Team’s Skills**

Engineers grow by taking on challenging tasks, making mistakes, and solving problems on their own. By hoarding work, you unintentionally rob them of that opportunity.

### 3. **It Improves Code Quality and System Resilience**

When you’re buried in individual contributor work, you have less time for big-picture thinking. Delegation frees you up to focus on architecture, technical strategy, and mentoring—things that make a long-term difference.

### 4. **It Reduces Burnout (for You and Your Team)**

A well-balanced workload leads to a healthier, more motivated team. When tech leads learn to delegate effectively, the entire team benefits—not just in productivity, but in overall job satisfaction.\

## Overcoming the Mental Barriers to Delegation

Most new tech leads struggle to delegate because of common fears. Let’s address them head-on:

### 1. **“I can do it faster myself.”**

Yes, you probably can—but at what cost? If you’re debugging a critical issue and another urgent task pops up, you’re now the bottleneck. If no one else has the experience because you’ve always done it yourself, you’ve limited your team’s effectiveness. Teaching others now may take more time, but in the long run, it creates a stronger, more independent team.

### 2. **“What if they mess up?”**

Mistakes are part of growth. Think of when you first tackled a complex system—did you get everything right the first time? Probably not. Instead of fearing errors, build in checkpoints where you can course-correct and turn mistakes into learning moments. Guide them, but don’t micromanage—trust that with time, they’ll improve and gain confidence.

### 3. **“I don’t want to lose technical skills.”**

Delegating doesn’t mean stepping away from engineering—it means leveling up. You’ll still be involved in technical decisions, but now as a leader who amplifies impact beyond just your own code.

## A Real-World Example: Delegation Gone Wrong (Then Right)

Alex had just stepped into a tech lead role at a fast-growing startup, eager to prove himself. Like many first-time tech leads, Alex wanted to prove their value by staying hands-on—code reviews, architecture decisions, and even minor bug fixes. By taking on too much, Alex became a bottleneck. Engineers started waiting for approvals instead of taking ownership, slowing everything down. Then, everything fell apart. A critical deadline was missed—not because the team lacked skill, but because Alex was too overloaded to review a key feature in time. The team grew frustrated, and Alex felt overwhelmed.

After a tough conversation, Alex realized that leadership wasn’t about doing everything—it was about enabling others. Holding onto every task wasn’t just overloading Alex; it was holding back the team’s growth. Alex started small—gradually delegating code reviews, assigning complex tickets to senior engineers, and mentoring junior developers. The shift wasn’t instant, but trust grew over time. The result? Faster feature delivery, higher team engagement, and more time to focus on technical strategy.

Lesson learned: By stepping back, Alex didn’t just free up time—he empowered the team to grow and succeed. Delegation isn’t about losing control—it’s about building a team that can succeed even when you’re not in the weeds of every task.

## The Right Way to Delegate: A Practical Framework

Now that we know *why* delegation matters, let’s get into *how* to do it effectively.

### **1. Identify What to Delegate**

Not every task should be delegated. Here’s how to decide what’s best to hand off:

*Example:* If a junior engineer is eager to grow, start by delegating a well-defined feature enhancement rather than a mission-critical bug fix.

- **Delegate if:**

  - It’s a well-defined task someone else can execute with guidance.
  - It’s a learning opportunity for a team member.
  - It’s a repeatable process that others should own.

- **Don’t delegate if:**

  - It requires critical architectural decisions that only you have the context for.
  - It’s a high-stakes, time-sensitive issue that would be inefficient to transfer.
  - It’s an area where you need to stay hands-on for leadership credibility.

💡 **Pro Tip:** Start with small tasks and increase complexity over time as trust builds.

### **2. Choose the Right Person**

Now that you know what to delegate, who should take it on? Here’s how to evaluate who’s best suited for the task.

Delegation isn’t just about offloading work—it’s about developing the right people. Even if they’re not perfect yet, delegation gives them the opportunity to grow through hands-on experience. Consider:

- **Skill Level:** Are they ready for this challenge, or will they need support?
- **Interest:** Does this align with their growth goals?
- **Workload:** Do they have capacity, or are they overloaded?

If no one is a perfect fit, that’s okay. Delegation is a development tool—it’s how they *become* ready.

### **3. Provide Context, Not Just Tasks**

Ever been handed a task without knowing why it mattered? It feels like busywork. Give your team the bigger picture. Make sure they understand:

- **Why it matters:** How it fits into the bigger picture.
- **What success looks like:** Clear expectations, but room for creativity.
- **Who to ask for help:** Not just you—encourage peer collaboration.

### **4. Stay Available, but Don’t Micromanage**

Micromanagement kills trust. Instead, set clear expectations upfront—then step back and let your team execute.

Once you delegate, your role shifts from *doing* to *guiding*. Here’s how to stay involved without overstepping:

- Check in at key milestones, but don’t hover.
- Encourage engineers to solve problems before coming to you.
- Give feedback and course-correct early if needed.

### **5. Give Credit and Reflect**

A great way to provide meaningful feedback is to be specific. For example, instead of simply saying, “Great job,” highlight what they did well: “Your approach to optimizing the API call reduced latency by 30%. That was an excellent way to balance performance and maintainability.”

People thrive when their work is recognized. Make it a habit to highlight wins, big or small.

- **Acknowledge contributions** in meetings or team chats.
- **Give public credit** to build confidence.
- **Provide private feedback** on what went well and what can improve.

## Final Thoughts: Letting Go is Hard—But Necessary

Why is letting go so difficult? Because delegation isn’t just about work—it’s about trust. At first, you’ll feel the pull to step in and take control. But remember: true leadership isn’t about doing everything yourself—it’s about **empowering others** to do their best work.

By learning to let go, you’re not just making your own job easier—you’re strengthening your team, improving software quality, and setting yourself up for long-term success. The best tech leads aren’t the ones who do it all—they’re the ones who help others rise.


The Art of Delegation: How to Let Go as a New Tech Lead


# Measuring Developer Productivity Without Micromanagement

Measuring developer productivity is tricky—done right, it drives growth; done wrong, it fuels resentment. Many companies fall into the trap of using flawed metrics—lines of code, commit counts, or hours worked—that fail to capture real impact. Worse, excessive tracking kills autonomy, leading to disengagement.

So what’s the better approach? Measure what truly matters and create an environment where developers can thrive.

## Why Traditional Productivity Metrics Fail

Many teams assume that simplistic metrics provide an objective measure of performance. In reality, they can be misleading and even harmful. Here’s why:

- **Lines of code** – Writing more doesn’t mean writing better. Sometimes the best engineering decision is to remove thousands of lines.
- **Number of commits** – Frequent commits look productive on paper but say nothing about quality or complexity.
- **Hours worked** – Software development isn’t factory work. More hours don’t equal better results—they often lead to burnout.
- **Story points completed** – Great for planning, but misleading for measuring individual performance. A two-point ticket can be far harder than an eight-pointer.

Relying on these metrics often encourages developers to "game the system" instead of focusing on meaningful improvements. To measure productivity effectively, we need to look deeper. So how do you measure what truly matters? Let’s explore a better approach.

### **A Real-World Example of Metric Misuse**

In the past, some companies made the mistake of measuring developer productivity by commit count. Engineers quickly caught on—splitting changes into tiny commits to boost their numbers. The result? More commits, but worse quality and slower delivery.

**The takeaway:** Metrics shape behavior. Before defining success, ask: What behaviors will this metric actually encourage?

## A Better Way: Measuring Impact Over Output

Productivity isn’t about code volume—it’s about impact. The best teams focus on value, not just output. But measuring impact isn’t always simple—success can look different across teams. Still, prioritizing value over volume helps engineers solve the right problems, write maintainable code, and collaborate effectively.

So what does this look like in practice? Here’s where great teams put their focus:&#x20;

### 1. **Code Quality and Maintainability**

Writing code is easy—writing scalable, maintainable code is the real challenge. Great engineers don’t just push features; they ensure their code is clean, well-documented, and built for the long haul.

**How do you measure that?**

- Are PRs well-reviewed and maintainable?
- Does the code follow best practices and reduce technical debt rather than add to it?
- Does it cause unexpected issues in production?

**How to measure it:**

- **Code review feedback** – Are they contributing meaningfully to discussions, catching issues, and refining their work? While feedback is useful, remember that code quality can sometimes be subjective depending on team standards and context.
- **Bug rates** – Are their changes introducing frequent defects, or is their code stable?
- **Maintainability** – Can teammates easily read, understand, and modify their code when needed?

### 2. **Effective Collaboration**

Collaboration isn’t just about working well with others—it’s about contributing to better decision-making and a stronger team. While collaboration can sometimes slow things down in the short term (e.g., deep technical discussions), it leads to better long-term outcomes.

Great engineers don’t just write code—they help their teams succeed. Collaboration isn’t about just being present; it’s about making communication more effective, reducing bottlenecks, and improving technical decisions.

**How to measure it:**

- Do they communicate clearly with the team?
- Are they proactive in unblocking others rather than working in isolation?
- Do they engage in architecture discussions and problem-solving?

**How to measure it:**

- **Peer feedback** – Do teammates value their input and find their communication helpful? While valuable, feedback doesn’t always capture quieter contributions that happen outside of direct interactions.
- **PR interaction** – Are they actively reviewing others’ code and providing useful feedback?
- **Participation in design discussions** – Are they engaged in improving technical decisions? Keep in mind that some engineers contribute effectively in ways that aren’t always visible in meetings or PRs.

### 3. **Business Impact**

Great engineers don’t just write code—they solve real problems that drive the business forward. The most productive developers focus on work that creates meaningful outcomes, not just what looks good on a sprint board. However, some of the most valuable work—like security improvements, refactoring, or reducing technical debt—may not have immediate business metrics but is critical for long-term success.

**How to measure it:**

- Are they working on the most valuable problems?
- Do their solutions align with business needs and user requirements?
- Are they simplifying systems rather than adding unnecessary complexity?

**How to measure it:**

- **Feature adoption** – Are users actually using what they build?
- **Incident reduction** – Do their changes improve stability and reliability?
- **Performance improvements** – Are they making the system faster, more efficient, and scalable?
- **Long-term investments** – Are they reducing technical debt, improving security, or enhancing scalability for future growth?

### 4. **Personal and Team Growth**

Strong engineers don’t just improve their own skills—they help their teams grow. Beyond writing code, they mentor, share knowledge, and elevate team performance.

**How to measure it:**

- Are they actively learning and expanding their technical skills?
- Do they mentor teammates and share knowledge effectively?
- Is their presence elevating the team’s performance and collaboration?

**How to measure it:**

- **Knowledge-sharing contributions** – Are they writing internal docs, giving presentations, or mentoring junior engineers?
- **Growth in responsibilities** – Are they taking on bigger challenges and showing leadership? This doesn’t always mean management—growth can also come from mastering a technical specialty.
- **Peer and manager feedback** – Do colleagues see them as a valuable, supportive team member?

## Encouraging Productivity Without Micromanagement

Micromanagement kills creativity, trust, and motivation. Yet, many companies struggle to measure productivity without falling into that trap. To get it right, focus on outcomes—not just tracking activity. Some industries require compliance tracking, but the best teams foster ownership, engagement, and real impact. Here’s how:

### **1. Set Clear Goals, Not Tasks**

#### **Why this matters:**

Productivity should be measured by outcomes, not just output. Tracking individual tickets may seem like a way to measure progress, but it often leads to micromanagement and task-driven work. While task tracking is necessary for project planning, it shouldn't be the sole measure of productivity.

#### **How to do it effectively:**

- Define what success looks like. Trust engineers to find the best way to achieve it.
- Adapt to different working styles. Some engineers prefer autonomy, while others (especially junior developers) may need structured guidance as they grow.
- Maintain a balanced approach. This keeps teams aligned while fostering ownership, problem-solving, and innovation.

### **2. Encourage Team-Driven Metrics**

The best teams define their own success indicators and take ownership of how they measure productivity.

#### **How to do it effectively:**

- Ensure metrics align with business goals. Otherwise, teams may focus on what’s easy to track instead of what drives real impact.
- Let teams refine their own processes. A self-driven team will continuously improve, but leadership support is crucial to ensuring alignment with company objectives.

### **3. Use Feedback Loops, Not Surveillance**

Regular check-ins, retrospectives, and peer reviews create a culture of continuous improvement. Developers thrive on timely feedback—not constant monitoring.

#### **How to do it effectively:**

- Prioritize conversations over dashboards. If someone is struggling, a supportive discussion is far more effective than tracking commit counts.
- Encourage feedback for growth, not control. Structured feedback loops should empower developers, not micromanage them.
- Use data-driven tracking wisely. When applied transparently, data (like identifying workflow bottlenecks) can help rather than control developers.

### **4. Addressing Common Concerns About Productivity Tracking**

Some managers worry that without tracking traditional metrics, productivity will drop. The best engineering teams prove the opposite:

#### **How to shift the focus to impact:**

- Measure impact instead of activity. Developers stay engaged, motivated, and focused on meaningful work when impact is the priority.
- Look at industry leaders. Google and Stripe prioritize impact over activity tracking, showing that this approach works.
- Ask better questions. Instead of asking, *“How much code did they write?”*, ask *“What impact did their work create?”*

### **5. Create an Environment of Trust and Autonomy**

Trust is the foundation of great engineering teams. Developers do their best work when they’re trusted, not micromanaged.

#### **How to build trust in your team:**

- Set clear goals but allow flexibility in execution.
- Provide guidance without overstepping.
- Encourage open communication.
- Give autonomy, and results will follow. Studies show that high-autonomy teams perform better, innovate more, and have lower turnover.

When developers feel ownership over their work, they naturally align with company goals—without constant oversight.

### **Industry Insights: What Leaders Say About Measuring Productivity**

The best engineering teams measure productivity by focusing on impact, not just output. However, companies define impact in different ways. Some emphasize autonomy, while others use structured goals like OKRs or business KPIs to align engineering work with business success.

**Let’s look at how leading companies and experts approach this:**

- **Kent Beck (Creator of Extreme Programming):** “Productivity is not about how much you do, but about how much impact your work has.”
- **Netflix Engineering Culture:** Netflix famously prioritizes freedom and responsibility over strict tracking, giving engineers the flexibility to prioritize high-impact work. However, teams still track key operational metrics, such as incident response and system reliability.
- **Google’s Engineering Teams:** Google evaluates engineers based on peer reviews, technical contributions, and overall impact rather than raw output metrics. At the same time, structured reviews ensure fair and consistent evaluations.

**The takeaway?** The best teams don’t just count work—they measure the difference it makes, ensuring their efforts align with real business needs.

## Conclusion

Measuring developer productivity isn’t about tracking activity—it’s about understanding impact. The best teams focus on what truly moves the business forward instead of getting lost in micromanagement. When you prioritize code quality, collaboration, business impact, and personal growth, you create an environment where developers thrive and businesses succeed.

**So how can you apply this approach?**

- Ditch misleading metrics. Code volume doesn’t equal value.
- Measure impact, not output. Prioritize quality, collaboration, and business outcomes.
- Set clear goals and trust your team. Autonomy fuels better work.
- Encourage autonomy. High-trust teams innovate more, perform better, and stay longer.
- Learn from top companies. Google and Netflix focus on impact, not tracking.

**The bottom line?** Trust your engineers, focus on meaningful outcomes, and productivity will take care of itself.


team management

Managing Underperforming Engineers with Empathy

Making Technical vs. Business Trade-Offs as a Tech Lead

The Art of Delegation: How to Let Go as a New Tech Lead

Measuring Developer Productivity Without Micromanagement