Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The ‘flawed five’ engineering productivity metrics

leaddev.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–124 of 124 posts

Re: The ‘flawed five’ engineering productivity metrics

#121

Post by roryokane »

This article written by Abi Noda in 2022 is suspiciously similar to the article https://www.usehaystack.io/blog/software-development-metrics... written by Julian Colina in 2021. Not only do both articles talk about the same five metrics, listed in the same order, this newer article does nothing but paraphrase the original article in its description of each metric.

For example, this newer article claims “a manager said … ‘Pull request count is the new vanity metric’”, while the original article stated that “Unfortunately it's a vanity metric”. And the last thing this newer article says about “impact” is that the name “sends a strong signal about how it should be used, particularly by managers”, matching the original article’s statement that “‘Impact’ suggests to executives and managers how this metrics should be used.”

As the original article isn’t cited, this borders on plagiarism.

Re: The ‘flawed five’ engineering productivity metrics

#122

Post by geekjock »

roryokane wrote: post #121

This article written by Abi Noda in 2022 is suspiciously similar to the article https://www.usehaystack.io/blog/software-development-metrics... written by Julian Colina in 2021. Not only do both articles talk about the same five metrics, listed in the same order, this newer article does nothing but paraphrase the original article in its description of each metric. For example, this newer article claims “a manager sai…

Article author here — thanks for raising this. My article here was published in April 2021 and repurposed from my GitHub Universe talk given in 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRJZldsHS3c

Julian's article was published May 2021, one month after my Leaddev article, so hopefully it's pretty self-evident that Julian plagiarized my article pretty blatantly. I don't know Julian but I've heard from my former customers that his company has copied a lot of the work I did for my previous company, Pull Panda: https://github.blog/2019-06-17-github-acquires-pull-panda/

Re: The ‘flawed five’ engineering productivity metrics

#123

Post by roryokane »

geekjock wrote: post #122
roryokane wrote: post #121

This article written by Abi Noda in 2022 is suspiciously similar to the article https://www.usehaystack.io/blog/software-development-metrics... written by Julian Colina in 2021. Not only do both articles talk about the same five metrics, listed in the same order, this newer article does nothing but paraphrase the original article in its description of each metric. For example, this newer article claims “a manager sai…

Article author here — thanks for raising this. My article here was published in April 2021 and repurposed from my GitHub Universe talk given in 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRJZldsHS3c Julian's article was published May 2021, one month after my Leaddev article, so hopefully it's pretty self-evident that Julian plagiarized my article pretty blatantly. I don't know Julian but I've heard from my former customer…

Oh, you’re right – your (Abi Noda’s) Leaddev article (https://leaddev.com/reporting-metrics/flawed-five-engineerin...) was published in 2021, not 2022. Sorry for getting that wrong. I think I confused the ad for “2022 Conferences & Events” at the start of the article with the publication date.

It doesn’t seem true that Julian’s Haystack article (https://www.usehaystack.io/blog/software-development-metrics...) was published in May 2021, even though that’s the date at the top of that article. It was apparently originally published in November 2020, as seen in a snapshot from December 2020: https://web.archive.org/web/20201204170826/https://www.useha.... Your article does seem to have been published in April 2021, as you say: https://web.archive.org/web/20210419071103/https://leaddev.c....

Though your article was published later, the talk you gave on this topic (your YouTube link) was from December 2019, before either article. Julian Colina’s article quotes many phrases from that talk directly, so it does indeed seem that you, Abi Noda, are the original source.

Re: The ‘flawed five’ engineering productivity metrics

#124

Post by geekjock »

roryokane wrote: post #123
geekjock wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Article author here — thanks for raising this. My article here was published in April 2021 and repurposed from my GitHub Universe talk given in 2019: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRJZldsHS3c Julian's article was published May 2021, one month after my Leaddev article, so hopefully it's pretty self-evident that Julian plagiarized my article pretty blatantly. I don't know Julian but I've heard from my former customer…

Oh, you’re right – your (Abi Noda’s) Leaddev article ( https://leaddev.com/reporting-metrics/flawed-five-engineerin... ) was published in 2021, not 2022. Sorry for getting that wrong. I think I confused the ad for “2022 Conferences & Events” at the start of the article with the publication date. It doesn’t seem true that Julian’s Haystack article ( https://www.usehaystack.io/blog/software-development-metrics... ) was…

Julian reached out to me respectfully to resolve the issue. Nice guy, no hard feelings. I understand the startup grind.
Post reply on HN