I've been in industry for 40 years. What I get from this is:
(1) The work itself is not amenable to objective metrics of performance. I'm not a software guy, even though I have built software analytical tools and models. But my tools had defined inputs and outputs, and the algorithmic relationships between the two were explicitly defined by mathematical equations. Internet stuff? How much of it is science and how much is styling? Who can say? What are the requirements? How do you know if the requirements are met? Vague requirements result in an endless game of horseshoes before somebody decides they are close enough to the goal (whatever that was).
(2) The management needs to be fired. The entire purpose of "management" is to optimize productivity in accordance with tasking and worker personal traits and capabilities. They get this far and realize "Hmm. We don't seem to be very productive"? Bad management. The workers might suck also, but you won't be able to tell until you have good management.
I've been in industry for 40 years. What I get from this is:
(1) The work itself is not amenable to objective metrics of performance. I'm not a software guy, even though I have built software analytical tools and models. But my tools had defined inputs and outputs, and the algorithmic relationships between the two were explicitly defined by mathematical equations. Internet stuff? How much of it is science and how much is styling? Who can say? What are the requirements? How do you know if the requirements are met? Vague requirements result in an endless game of horseshoes before somebody decides they are close enough to the goal (whatever that was).
(2) The management needs to be fired. The entire purpose of "management" is to optimize productivity in accordance with tasking and worker personal traits and capabilities. They get this far and realize "Hmm. We don't seem to be very productive"? Bad management. The workers might suck also, but you won't be able to tell until you have good management.