An Elegant Puzzle: Systems of Engineering Management

by Will Larson

I’m pretty confident that these measures will significantly improve the distribution of and access to opportunity, but we can do better. We can measure. I’ve found measurability of opportunity to be surprisingly high, which is one of the reasons I think it’s an effective pillar in thinking about inclusion. The metrics that have been useful for me: Retention is the most important measure of availability of opportunity, although it’s also a very lagging indicator. This should be the first thing you’re paying attention to, but you must recognize that it’s slow to show change. Usage rate is how often folks get picked in project selection.2 The number of distinct team members picked to lead critical projects is a particularly interesting measure. Level distribution is useful, in particular comparing cohorts of folks with different backgrounds. People want role models for themselves in senior roles at the company where they work, which is why looking at the representation of underrepresented minorities and women is only a start. You also want to look in each role and level of seniority. Time at level is how long team members wait between promotions. How does this compare across cohorts? Something to watch for is that this number is also greatly influenced by initial level at hiring. For example, time at level might look equivalent because some cohorts are being under-leveled at time of hire.