The opposite problem also applies, DORA takes no account of how complex a change may be. Also, DORA often spreads across multiple teams (dev vs ops, etc). So using DORA as performance metrics for team management is a thorny subject at best.
As we all know, a more complicated change increases the size of the commit, and the amount of time in development and test.
The obvious answer, is to integrate Story Points into the metrics, to get an idea of "how long it takes 1 Story Point to be running code in Production" - but then we descend into the debate about how to determine story points, if we should use Fibonacci, how Story Points from team A measure to Story Points from team B.... etc etc (and a myriad of other problems).
Don't get me wrong, DORA is a good start if you have nothing else, but no matter what you're tracking or how you're tracking it, someone will gamify it the second you start tracking it.
The opposite problem also applies, DORA takes no account of how complex a change may be. Also, DORA often spreads across multiple teams (dev vs ops, etc). So using DORA as performance metrics for team management is a thorny subject at best.
As we all know, a more complicated change increases the size of the commit, and the amount of time in development and test.
The obvious answer, is to integrate Story Points into the metrics, to get an idea of "how long it takes 1 Story Point to be running code in Production" - but then we descend into the debate about how to determine story points, if we should use Fibonacci, how Story Points from team A measure to Story Points from team B.... etc etc (and a myriad of other problems).
Don't get me wrong, DORA is a good start if you have nothing else, but no matter what you're tracking or how you're tracking it, someone will gamify it the second you start tracking it.
Thanks for the breakdown, Dave. I appreciate it!