Quels indicateurs devriez-vous utiliser pour mesurer les performances d’une équipe de conception de logiciels ?

Perhaps the most important is the needs and expectations of users rather than stakeholders, because in most cases stakeholders "only" think what users really need and are not based on real expectations. The first step is therefore to define the target users and to map the users' expectations and define a metrics to it.

The choice of metrics is connected to the unique goals and context of the development project. Every project should define specific, measurable success factors, whether functional or non-functional. To effectively measure the performance of a design team, select metrics that directly align with project goals and significantly impact success or alleviate pain points in the chosen timeframe. Metrics could be page views, conversion rates, and end-user satisfaction, alongside non-functional metrics like on-time delivery, defect count, adherence to design principles, team morale, and overall project downtime, offer a holistic view of the team's effectiveness. The key is to prioritize metrics that are most relevant at that time.

To my opinion the most important thing is the customer satisfaction by functionality and quality. This includes usability and accessibility of the product.

Another aspect here is that the initial goals and objectives may have bias, one should find ways to test for this and feed it back into the evaluation process.

There are two important aspects to Goal Alignment. First is to ensure that the goal has a high potential for value, is achievable and is funded. Unfortunately you cannot predict value, but you can use tools like Wardley Mapping, feedback and more to get a better sense of the potential. The second is that the solution is designed not only to achieve the goal today, but is adaptive toward the future when, not if, goals change. Principles of Domain-Driven Design can assist with setting appropriate boundaries between modules and features to better enable fluid upgrades to maintain alignment with the goals as they shift.

An additional aspect of quality is the speed at which you can change core concepts without breaking the whole. Modularity coupled with the single responsibility clause may be decently suited to describe this.

Bug/Error Rates Assess the number and severity of bugs or errors in the software. Lower bug rates indicate higher code quality and thorough testing. Code Review Feedback Evaluate the feedback received during code reviews. Positive feedback and timely addressing of issues suggest a focus on quality and collaboration.

Ensure the team(s) are aligned on the end to end customer goal and as they own all aspects of their features including quality and delivery it will be clear what areas to improve on

Any team that cares about maintainability and adaptability will want to test their architecture using analytics used in tools like CodeScene because standard static code analysis will not catch the issues that managers really care about like, will we have developers who know critical components if this one developer leaves. This type of analysis not only covers cohesion/coupling risks, but will also help surface rising complexity trends in any subsystem and their components. This is not something most tools are measuring today.

For me, it's important to create software under standards that provide the guides to resolve the required functionality and de structure of each component that makes up the solution.

Velocity In agile environments, track the team's velocity, which represents the amount of work completed in each iteration. Consistent or increasing velocity can indicate improved efficiency. Lead Time Measure the time it takes for a task or feature to move from conception to completion. Lower lead times suggest efficient workflows.

However, depending on the complexity of the tasks that need to be implemented, these metrics may vary widely between teams. It is important to view productivity as a whole, not in silos. Especially if there are many teams that are working on the same service/product/system/stream.

To gauge team productivity, employing metrics such as velocity (rate of progress), throughput (amount of work done in a specific time), cycle time (duration to complete tasks), and return on investment (ROI) is crucial. These metrics provide a comprehensive view of the team's productivity, enabling managers to identify areas for improvement and understand the team's ability to deliver value within the given constraints.

Coordination and cooperation can also be measured in terms of reduction in communication latency, which could be foster by the presence of a design language and proper documentation

Since the 'age of remote work', more organizations have been using documentation as a way to achieve this 'measurability' of communication. It can also serve as an excellent source of truth in software design.

The best way to form your teams is along the contour of the solution needed using Conway's law to your advantage. If you have the need for a platform team, vertical teams, mentoring teams, then you might want to look at Team Topologies to organize for success. Also, look at the life cycle of development. Do you have enough representation across the cycle, from requirements (yes, business involvement) to deployment to ensure concerns throughout are managed well. One key is to make sure people know the value they bring and bring it. So, the business should not be telling developers how to code, and developers should not be telling the business what their business should be doing. Suggestions are welcome, but they are just suggestions.

The most important thing, it's to get a team, not a group of people. Although it is not a family, they are people with whom you will be in constant communication several hours a day, several days a week for a while. Teams have that advantage called communication, which gives them the strength to move things forward and not leave anyone behind; that is, solve problems and celebrate victories.

Team collaboration is a pivotal aspect of a software design team’s performance, involving various roles and disciplines. It encompasses communication, coordination, and cooperation. Effective communication, marked by clear and continuous exchange of information, ideas, and feedback, is fundamental to a cohesive team dynamic. Coordination, ensuring the organized and synchronized execution of tasks and activities, is crucial for maintaining project timelines and coherence. Cooperation, characterized by mutual support and assistance among team members, fosters a positive and productive work environment.

An ideal environment allows you to fail fast and shorten the learning feedback loop. There are many practices that can help achieve this faster, but in the end it is part of an organizational culture. This will require support on all levels of the organization.

To effectively measure team learning, employing methods such as feedback loops, retrospectives, experiments, and documentation of lessons learned is beneficial. These approaches not only track the progress and growth of the team but also encourage a culture of continuous improvement and adaptability, which is vital in the dynamic field of software design.

One great metric on engagement and teams health is to tie the team’s commitments on a quarterly basis. If the team is healthy they have all they need to deliver from takeoff to landing and their performance (time to deliver, velocity, happiness, and quality) should be part of their review as individuals and team health.

In the realm of software design, where technology meets human ingenuity, the degree of team engagement can be the differentiating factor between a good project and an exceptional one. It's not merely about the lines of code; it's about the hearts and minds behind them, united in purpose, creativity, and a relentless pursuit of excellence.

Measuring the performance of a software design team involves assessing various key metrics. Effectiveness in meeting project deadlines, adherence to specifications, and the ability to deliver high-quality, maintainable code are crucial indicators. Tracking the team's collaboration and communication, both within the team and with other departments, provides insights into their overall efficiency. Additionally, monitoring the frequency and severity of bugs post-implementation, as well as user satisfaction, offers valuable perspectives on the team's impact. Regularly reviewing these metrics ensures a comprehensive evaluation of the software design team's performance and can guide continuous improvement efforts.

In exploring the measurement of engineering productivity, it's crucial to start by understanding the 'Why'. Aligning the team around the purpose behind the metrics is key. It goes beyond tracking progress to identifying and addressing specific challenges. Establishing a baseline for the team’s current standing in terms of value delivery is a practical starting point. Utilising appropriate metrics for the team/company, such as DORA for web application teams, provides visibility and indicates focus areas. This approach, while initially set, should be adaptable, evolving as the team and challenges grow. It ensures the efforts in measuring productivity are meaningful and contribute to a collective growth and improvement.

One anecdotal analysis that anyone close to the code who knows the business might want to consider is term alignment analysis. Do the methods and properties hold the language of the business, and more importantly, do those behaviors do what the business expects as they are defined by the terms. If not, you have some areas for quality improvement.

In certain industries the customer engagement can be a vital metric on the design and success of a product during the scope and prototype phases. This metric can be an early indicator of the over all teams progress or the products viability.