These dots represent programmers at your company. We arranged them according to how fast they turn around assignments. Which are your "best" programmers? 
Ah, but there is a trap here. It's a one-axis image. Is speed all that there is to development? Is the one who makes the most output doing the most good, or the most damage?
It's like we need a second axis to make this representation meaningful. The colors sort of imply that, no?
So, what if we use "safety" -- which is sustainable quality, recoverability, maintainability, serviceability -- to the graph? Now a different picture emerges.
Are these the best developers because they go fastest? Or is it one great programmer, one pretty good, and two disaster artists (people who rot out the code base quickly)?
Are these the worst, because they're slower, or are these the people recovering and saving your code base (from the disaster artists' work)?
If you had to make a staff reduction, who would you get rid of?
If you had to promote someone, who would you promote?
What kinds of developers are good for your product, which are not?
Questions for a Wednesday deep-think.
If you had to promote someone, who would you promote?
What kinds of developers are good for your product, which are not?
Questions for a Wednesday deep-think.
And what would happen if you promoted the four fastest? You would have two managers pushing "disaster artist" behaviors, and only one promoting safe and sustainable development. How would that turn out for you?
