Management-Driven Metrics Versus Metric-Driven Management |
|
| Saturday, 09 February 2008 10:19 |
Performance
and quality metrics are not indigenous to traditional IT practices. When metrics are brought to bear to achieve
greater transparency or compliance in an IT project, they are imposed on teams,
grafted on top of day-to-day execution.
The poor alignment of metric to execution means project managers must
constantly translate work effort into progress measures. Because these acts of translation take a lot
of time and are not natural fits with execution, project management is often
opaque and inconsistent. By comparison, business-oriented
metrics are natural byproducts of the way work is performed in Agile
practices. Measures of progress, quality,
and functional completeness are extensions of day-to-day execution of Agile
practices. This means that instead of
chasing after management data, the Agile manager is able to concentrate his or
her efforts managing the people in a team to achieve the business goal. Performance
and quality metrics are not indigenous to traditional IT practices. When metrics are brought to bear to achieve
greater transparency or compliance in an IT project, they are imposed on teams,
grafted on top of day-to-day execution.
The poor alignment of metric to execution means project managers must
constantly translate work effort into progress measures. Because these acts of translation take a lot
of time and are not natural fits with execution, project management is often
opaque and inconsistent. By comparison, business-oriented
metrics are natural byproducts of the way work is performed in Agile
practices. Measures of progress, quality,
and functional completeness are extensions of day-to-day execution of Agile
practices. This means that instead of
chasing after management data, the Agile manager is able to concentrate his or
her efforts managing the people in a team to achieve the business goal.Read more >>
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Hits: 1174 Trackback(0)Comments (0)
|


Performance
and quality metrics are not indigenous to traditional IT practices. When metrics are brought to bear to achieve
greater transparency or compliance in an IT project, they are imposed on teams,
grafted on top of day-to-day execution.
The poor alignment of metric to execution means project managers must
constantly translate work effort into progress measures. Because these acts of translation take a lot
of time and are not natural fits with execution, project management is often
opaque and inconsistent. By comparison, business-oriented
metrics are natural byproducts of the way work is performed in Agile
practices. Measures of progress, quality,
and functional completeness are extensions of day-to-day execution of Agile
practices. This means that instead of
chasing after management data, the Agile manager is able to concentrate his or
her efforts managing the people in a team to achieve the business goal.
