Many organizations have been trying to find better ways to build and deploy software for their customers. Whether they deal with the general public or internal customers, we know that delivering software that customers use can be a competitive advantage. That's the goal of DevOps.

While most developers and management want to do this, they sometimes forget what the goal is. Instead, they want to continue to work in a similar manner themselves while giving lip service to actual change. They often do this while pushing others to somehow produce more and better software inside the same system. I see this over and over inside various companies.

To become better, many of us use metrics and measurement of data to help guide us in determining how to move forward. In the area of software, there are a number of research reports showing which metrics are indicative of organizations that do a good job of delivering value to their customers. There are four main metrics: deploy frequency, lead time, change fail percentage, and mean time to repair. These are highlighted, though there are plenty of other things to track in your software process.

However, aiming to just improve their metrics as the primary goal isn't going to make your software better. The goal is to deliver software that meets your customers' needs. Quicker, better quality, more features, and all those things that customers use are what is important. These metrics are there to help guide you, not to be the targets of efforts.  There's a good article that talks about some of the downsides of just trying to improve these metrics.

The goal is the continuous delivery of value to customers. The way we do this is by experimenting with code, getting rapid feedback from customers, adjusting and improving the code, and repeating the process, learning from our efforts. We drive automation to make this smooth and easy while enabling us to get our software to customers at the pace that suits our situation. It sounds vague and amorphous, and it is.

There is a bit of an art to developing a process that efficiently builds software. It depends highly on the people involved, and on two other things. First, guiding them to improve their process and skills with references to practices that have worked well. Second, giving them the freedom and support to experiment and learn from their efforts. In doing those two things, it's important to remember that while you can measure how well things are changing, aiming to improve the measurements often doesn't help you improve the goal: building better software.

It's good to measure things, but keep in mind that the measures are not the goal.