Improving developer performance starts with identifying the right metrics—and knowing how to act on them. By distinguishing between macro diagnostic metrics (e.g., cycle time) and the causal metrics that drive them (e.g., number of commits per PR), developers can take targeted, actionable steps to improve.

1️⃣ External Workflow Inefficiencies

These are inefficiencies that stem from how your work is received and processed by teammates, particularly in the context of code reviewing and knowledge sharing.

➡️ Key Metrics to Watch:

1. Average Time to First Review: In Cycle Time → Review Time
2. Number of Follow-on Commits: In PR Insights → Resolution → Closed Metrics
3. Number of Comments per PR: In PR Insights → Resolution → Closed Metrics

If any of these metrics are high, it likely indicates that:

• PRs are hard to review,
• reviewers struggle to understand the context,
• or review processes are delayed due to lack of clarity or structure.

📘

These issues are tightly linked to broader metrics like Cycle Time or PR Failure Rate. But rather than telling a developer to “reduce cycle time,” which is vague, it’s more effective to drill down into the causal indicators that drive it.

➡️ Causal Metric Patterns to Investigate
Use these to pinpoint where the real inefficiencies lie:

• Traceability: Are PRs clearly linked to Jira tickets or work items?
• Number of Commits per PR: Are you batching too much into a single request?
• Number of Files per PR: Is the PR too large to review efficiently?

If all of these are weak, it likely points to a personal workflow problem. This means:

• Your PRs might be too large or difficult to review.
• You may not be providing enough context (e.g., using vague titles or skipping descriptions).
• You're not splitting work into digestible, logical units.

✅ Actionable Fixes:

• Include ticket numbers in PR titles.
• Write clear, concise PR descriptions.
• Break down large changes into smaller, more focused PRs.

2️⃣ Internal Workflow Inefficiencies

These are aspects of your workflow that are under your full control, and not directly tied to team interaction.

Aside from honing your coding skills, there are two practical areas where you can improve:

➡️ Review the Type of Work You’re Assigned
Check your personal metrics in Contributor Insights.

• Are you spending a disproportionate amount of time on refactoring or Help Others work?
• Is your ratio of new work vs. maintenance skewed compared to the team average?

🚩

If so, advocate for redistributing low-impact or repetitive work. You should be involved in meaningful new work—not cleaning up after others or stuck maintaining legacy systems.

➡️Audit Your Code Review Responsibilities
If you’re carrying the bulk of the team’s code reviews:

• It could mean you're a trusted reviewer—but also at risk of burnout.
• Check whether review responsibilities are being shared fairly.

✅ Actionable Fix:

• Discuss review distribution during retros or 1:1s.
• Help set boundaries to avoid review overload.
• Encourage rotation or pairing on review duties.

3️⃣ Key Takeaways

• Macro metrics like Cycle Time are just symptoms; you need to dig into causal metrics to improve them.
• External inefficiencies often stem from how others experience your work—optimize clarity, traceability, and PR structure.
• Internal inefficiencies come from the kind of work you do and how much of the team’s load you're absorbing—balance is key.
• Use tools like Contributor Insights and PR Metrics to benchmark against your team and make informed adjustments.