Developer Performance Scorecard

For Non-Technical Founders Who Need to Evaluate Their Dev Teams

Quick Team Assessment (15 minutes)

Section 1: Delivery Performance (25 points)

Feature Cycle Time (5 points)

• Small features complete in 1-2 weeks (5 pts)
• Small features complete in 2-4 weeks (3 pts)
• Small features complete in 4+ weeks (1 pt)
• No consistent cycle time measurement (0 pts)

Estimate Accuracy (5 points)

• Estimates typically within 25% of actual (5 pts)
• Estimates typically within 50% of actual (3 pts)
• Estimates typically 2x actual time (1 pt)
• Estimates are consistently way off (0 pts)

Deployment Frequency (5 points)

• Daily deployments (5 pts)
• Weekly deployments (4 pts)
• Bi-weekly deployments (2 pts)
• Monthly or less frequent (0 pts)

Scope Creep Management (5 points)

• Clear scope documentation and change process (5 pts)
• Informal but effective scope management (3 pts)
• Frequent scope changes without process (1 pt)
• No scope management (0 pts)

Emergency Response (5 points)

• Rare emergencies, quick resolution (5 pts)
• Occasional emergencies, managed well (3 pts)
• Weekly firefighting mode (1 pt)
• Constant crisis management (0 pts)

Section 2: Quality Indicators (20 points)

Bug Escape Rate (5 points)

• 90%+ bugs caught before customers (5 pts)
• 80-90% bugs caught internally (4 pts)
• 70-80% bugs caught internally (2 pts)
• Customer finds most bugs (0 pts)

Technical Debt Management (5 points)

• Regular refactoring, low technical debt (5 pts)
• Manageable technical debt with plan (3 pts)
• Growing technical debt concerns (1 pt)
• Technical debt blocking progress (0 pts)

Code Review Process (5 points)

• Consistent peer reviews before deployment (5 pts)
• Informal but regular code reviews (3 pts)
• Sporadic code reviews (1 pt)
• No code review process (0 pts)

Testing Coverage (5 points)

• Automated tests catch regressions (5 pts)
• Manual testing prevents most issues (3 pts)
• Minimal testing, some issues slip through (1 pt)
• Little to no testing process (0 pts)

Section 3: Team Health (25 points)

Developer Satisfaction (5 points)

• Team regularly expresses satisfaction (5 pts)
• Team generally positive with minor concerns (3 pts)
• Team has significant frustrations (1 pt)
• Team expresses major dissatisfaction (0 pts)

Knowledge Sharing (5 points)

• Strong documentation and knowledge transfer (5 pts)
• Good informal knowledge sharing (3 pts)
• Limited knowledge sharing (1 pt)
• Knowledge silos and single points of failure (0 pts)

Professional Growth (5 points)

• Clear growth paths and skill development (5 pts)
• Some growth opportunities provided (3 pts)
• Limited growth opportunities (1 pt)
• No professional development focus (0 pts)

Team Retention (5 points)

• Less than 10% annual turnover (5 pts)
• 10-20% annual turnover (3 pts)
• 20-30% annual turnover (1 pt)
• Over 30% annual turnover (0 pts)

Communication Effectiveness (5 points)

• Clear, regular business-technical communication (5 pts)
• Good communication with minor gaps (3 pts)
• Communication challenges but workable (1 pt)
• Poor communication causing problems (0 pts)

Section 4: Business Alignment (20 points)

Priority Understanding (5 points)

• Team clearly understands business priorities (5 pts)
• Team generally aligned with business goals (3 pts)
• Some disconnect between team and business (1 pt)
• Team working without clear business context (0 pts)

Stakeholder Communication (5 points)

• Regular, effective stakeholder updates (5 pts)
• Good stakeholder communication overall (3 pts)
• Inconsistent stakeholder communication (1 pt)
• Poor stakeholder communication (0 pts)

Feature Value Delivery (5 points)

• Features consistently drive business metrics (5 pts)
• Most features provide clear business value (3 pts)
• Mixed value from delivered features (1 pt)
• Unclear business value from development work (0 pts)

Resource Efficiency (5 points)

• Development budget used efficiently (5 pts)
• Generally good resource utilization (3 pts)
• Some resource waste but manageable (1 pt)
• Significant resource inefficiency (0 pts)

Section 5: Process Maturity (10 points)

Planning Process (5 points)

• Structured planning with clear milestones (5 pts)
• Informal but effective planning (3 pts)
• Basic planning with some structure (1 pt)
• Ad-hoc planning or no planning process (0 pts)

Risk Management (5 points)

• Proactive risk identification and mitigation (5 pts)
• Some risk awareness and planning (3 pts)
• Reactive risk management (1 pt)
• No formal risk management (0 pts)

Scoring Guide

Total Points: ____/100

Score Interpretation:

90-100 points: Excellent Your team is performing at a high level. Focus on maintaining standards and planning for scale.

75-89 points: Good Solid foundation with room for optimization. Identify 1-2 key areas for improvement.

60-74 points: Needs Improvement Several areas requiring attention. Consider process improvements and potentially external guidance.

45-59 points: Significant Issues Multiple critical areas need addressing. Strong recommendation for engineering management consultation.

Below 45 points: Crisis Mode Immediate intervention needed. Your development investment is at high risk.

Action Plan Template

Immediate Actions (Next 30 days):

Short-term Goals (Next 90 days):

Areas for External Help:

□ Engineering management consulting □ Technical due diligence □ Team performance optimization □ Hiring and talent evaluation □ Process implementation

Ready to improve your scores? Our engineering management experts have helped 200+ non-technical founders optimize their development teams. Schedule a consultation to discuss your specific situation and improvement plan.