Some KPIs help you build better software. Others just help you look busy.

There’s a huge difference between tracking activity and measuring success – but in software development, we often confuse the two.

Lines of code. Story points completed. Bugs closed.

These metrics are easy to track, easy to game, and almost totally disconnected from real value. A developer can crank out 500 lines of code that make a system worse – or fix a major issue with just 5 lines. They can close 10 tiny tickets in a sprint while avoiding the one gnarly feature the product actually needs.

And the worst part? If leadership is watching the wrong metrics, they’ll reward the wrong behavior.

So, what should we be measuring?

Let’s start with the team level – what actually tells you whether the software is successful:

✅ Lead Time to Production

How quickly can we go from code committed to code deployed? Shorter lead time means faster iteration, tighter feedback loops, and quicker value to customers.

✅ Change Failure Rate

When we ship code, how often does it cause bugs, rollbacks, or outages? High failure rates point to problems with testing, process, or quality. Low rates mean we’re shipping with confidence.

✅ Feature Adoption

Are users actually using the things we’re building? This can be tracked through analytics, usage events, and even feedback from customer support. If a “high priority” feature ships and no one touches it, that’s a red flag.

✅ Time to Value

How long does it take a new user (or a power user) to achieve their goal? This metric ties development back to usability, not just features.

✅ System Health

Uptime, error rates, latency – these are the basics, but they matter. If your software is slow or constantly breaking, users won’t stick around.

These are harder to fake, harder to inflate, and harder to ignore. They reflect actual outcomes, not just activity.

But what about measuring individual developers?

This is where things get tricky.

First, let’s say the quiet part out loud: most developer-level KPIs are harmful if used wrong. They create pressure to game the system, and often push devs toward short-term wins instead of long-term impact.

But that doesn’t mean we can’t measure anything. It just means we need to be smart.

Here are a few things worth paying attention to at the individual level:

👉 Code Quality

Not lines of code, but: are they writing maintainable, testable code? Are they following conventions? Contributing to shared libraries? This is best assessed through code review culture – not numbers.

👉 Ownership

Does the developer follow through on features end to end? Do they jump in when their work causes downstream issues? Ownership isn’t just about getting things done – it’s about taking responsibility for outcomes.

👉 Collaboration

Are they unblocking teammates? Mentoring juniors? Pushing thoughtful PRs? Some of the most valuable devs don’t write the most code – they amplify others.

👉 Problem-Solving

Can they take a vague requirement and turn it into a working solution? Do they raise risks early? Are they the person others go to when things get weird?

None of these show up on a Jira dashboard. But they’re what separates great developers from ones who just look productive.

Wrapping up

Good KPIs align teams around outcomes. They give leadership clarity, keep developers focused, and help the business improve over time.

Bad KPIs create busywork, burnout, and mistrust.

So next time you’re choosing what to track – whether for the team or for individuals – ask yourself:

Does this measure activity… or impact?

Get that right, and the rest tends to follow.

What KPIs have you seen that actually move the needle?