What improves developer productivity at google? code quality

Cheng, Lan; Murphy-Hill, Emerson; Canning, Mark; Jaspan, Ciera; Green, Collin; Knight, Andrea; Zhang, Nan; Kammer, Elizabeth

doi:10.1145/3540250.3558940

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We've seen this connection before though; in prior research, we found that developers' perceptions of code quality were early indicators of their later perceptions of developer velocity. 11 This is interesting because it highlights that our three components of productivity (speed, ease, and quality) are not always in strict tradeoffs with each other; in some cases, they can also amplify each other.…”

Section: Code Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Developer Productivity for Humans, Part 7: Software Quality

Green,

Jaspan,

Hodges

et al. 2024

IEEE Softw.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Code Qualitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Developer Productivity for Humans, Part 7: Software Quality

Green,

Jaspan,

Hodges

et al. 2024

IEEE Softw.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As a result of these shortcomings, in a recurring Google survey called the Engineering Satisfaction Survey [7] that helps with understanding the needs of Google engineers, design review has been highlighted over several years as a significant pain point by both authors and approvers of design documents, and as a major hindrance to software development velocity, as full approval is typically desired and required to move on to the implementation phase.…”

Section: (B)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving Design Reviews at Google

Ziftci,

Greenberg

2023

2023 38th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering (ASE)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design review is an important initial phase of the software development life-cycle where stakeholders gain and discuss early insights into the design's viability, discover potentially costly mistakes, and identify inconsistencies and inadequacies. For improved development velocity, it is important that design owners get their designs approved as quickly as possible.In this paper, we discuss how engineering design reviews are typically conducted at Google, and propose a novel, structured, automated solution to improve design review velocity. Based on data collected on 141,652 approved documents authored by 41,030 users over four years, we show that our proposed solution decreases median time-to-approval by 25%, and provides further gains when used consistently. We also provide qualitative data to demonstrate our solution's success, discuss factors that impact design review latency, propose strategies to tackle them, and share lessons learned from the usage of our solution.

show abstract