Not everyone works in software. It can be hard to measure deliverables in a position that isn't deliverable-oriented. Maybe you're crucial to the department but your output isn't measurable directly.

> It is not that hard to measure, at the end of the day code needs to be written. If the work you are doing is design heavy, then documents and charts need to be created. And then code needs to be written. Then finally, a product or feature needs to actually be launched.

Very naive. If this was my manager, I would immediately know that my manager is unskilled.

Well I'm not a manager so it is naive but I've been working at these companies for close to a decade now and they produce nothing and there is rampant waste everywhere.

So the current management philosophy just sucks.

Also I'm very good at what I do (developing software), the common thing among the people that produce actual value to companies is that they are high output. Whether it's code or designs or whatever. And I'm talking about quality output obviously.

Was that feature the right feature though? How do you measure the org’s ability to ship another feature after that at an engineering level (ie, is it easy to maintain? Did they do good documentation or mentor others?) You very quickly end up with giant spreadsheets of tons of variables trying to model this without “customers gave us more money” which rarely works at the individual or even team level.

I think about stories like this:

https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Negative_2000_Li...