Has anyone had any success with evaluating the impact of using Generative AI tools such as GitHub's Copilot on the productivity or performance impact on developers? I see a lot of qualitative discussions about how developers say they are more productive, but how are you measuring that impact?
Sort by:
From my perspective, we proved the value of Generative AI (Development co-pilots) by focusing on two key areas. First, we measured our team's velocity, establishing a clear baseline before introducing the tool and seeing a sustained increase in story points completed per sprint afterward.
Second, we went beyond just counting pull requests. We tracked PR cycle time—the time from creation to merge—and saw a significant drop. For us, that was the key insight: we weren't just writing more code, we were delivering and merging it much faster without compromising quality.
There are multiple ways to check on the productivity improvements
Baseline Velocity / throughput of past X months which was without any code companion. Track the velocity / throughput post the code companion usage - to get a steady state view try for atleast 3 - 6 sprints : during this period ensure the developer is encourage to use the tool. The telemetry reports will provide how many are actively using the tool, how many prompt are being done / accepted etc. Make corrections based on this data report - if teams need more training provide so, if they need additional time to get used to using the tool provide so, we also have devised mechanisms to check lines of code generated - human vs machine generated (check latest announcements from GHCP for these aspects)
Once in regular use for build, you see the trend moving upwards & various quantitative & qualitative metrics of regular development will be able to show the outcomes - code quality, velocity, time to market etc
I use GitHub Copilot almost daily, and I am an experienced Java developer. It actually makes me more productive when creating some patterns and refactoring, unit testing. I am exploring further at this point. What I can say is probably increasing my output 2x fold. The caveat is I still check the code generated for validity. I bet that senior devs will use the tool more efficiently due to the fact they know what to ask, based on their experience.
Any specific use cases that you might be able to share with using GitHub CoPilot?
The Multi-Dimensional Measurement Framework
Moving Beyond Vanity Metrics
Traditional metrics like acceptance rates and lines of code are what we call "vanity metrics" - they look impressive but fail to correlate with actual engineering productivity or business outcomes. Here's why:
Acceptance Rate Blindness: A 30% acceptance rate tells you nothing about whether that code made it to production, improved quality, or delivered customer value
The Lines of Code Fallacy: More code often means more technical debt, not more productivity
Activity vs. Outcomes: High tool usage doesn't equal high effectiveness
Four Pillars of AI Impact Measurement
Pillar 1: Development Efficiency (Inner Loop Metrics)
We track how AI impacts the developer's immediate workflow:
Time to First Commit: 30-50% reduction indicates genuine acceleration
Code Review Efficiency: Monitor if reviews take longer due to AI verification needs
Defect Density Patterns: Track whether AI-generated code has different defect characteristics
Pillar 2: Delivery Excellence (Outer Loop Metrics)
This measures the journey from code commit to production:
Lead Time for Changes: The ultimate velocity metric that can't be gamed
Change Failure Rate: Reveals if speed comes at the cost of quality
Mean Time to Recovery: Shows if AI code is harder to debug and fix
Pillar 3: Quality Indicators
Beyond functionality, we measure maintainability and sustainability:
Code Maintainability Index: Ensures AI isn't creating future technical debt
Security Compliance Rate: Tracks AI-specific vulnerability patterns
Architecture Compliance Score: Monitors if AI respects system design principles
Pillar 4: Business Impact
The ultimate measure of success:
Revenue per Developer: Shows improved developer leverage
Time to Market Acceleration: Measures actual delivery speed improvement
Quality-Adjusted Velocity: Prevents celebrating speed while quality erodes
Key Indicators That AI is Genuinely Helping (Not Hindering)
Positive Signals:
Consistent Quality Metrics: Defect rates remain stable or improve (target: 60%)
Developer Satisfaction: Reduced time on boilerplate, more on innovation
Sustainable Velocity: Speed improvements persist beyond initial adoption
Warning Signs of Added Confusion:
Increasing Review Cycles: More back-and-forth during code reviews
Rising MTTR: Problems take longer to fix due to unfamiliar AI patterns
Architecture Drift: AI-generated code violates established patterns
Quality Degradation: Defect rates increase despite productivity claims
Developer Frustration: Time spent correcting AI exceeds time saved
The Opsera Leadership Dashboard Approach
Our unified dashboard provides executives with a single view that correlates:
Copilot Impact Score: Weighted combination of adoption, acceptance, and effectiveness
Throughput Analysis: Say/Do percentage reveals if AI enables reliable delivery
Quality Correlation: Defect density trends show quality impact
Value Stream Visibility: Traces code from creation to customer value
Avoiding Common Pitfalls
The Metric Gaming Phenomenon
Teams may optimize for metrics rather than outcomes. We prevent this through:
Balanced scorecards that consider multiple dimensions
Regular metric rotation to prevent gaming
Focus on business outcomes over activity metrics
The Quality Sacrifice Spiral
We implement quality gates that can't be bypassed:
Mandatory test coverage thresholds
Security scanning requirements
Performance regression limits
Technical debt ceilings
The Over-Reliance Trap
Maintain engineering fundamentals through:
"AI-free" days for critical thinking
Architecture review requirements
Pair programming mixing AI and manual coding
The Path Forward
To genuinely determine if AI tools are helping your engineers:
Implement Comprehensive Measurement: Track the entire value chain from code creation to business impact
Focus on Outcomes, Not Activity: Measure delivered value, not tool usage
Monitor Quality Alongside Speed: Ensure velocity doesn't sacrifice sustainability
Calculate True ROI: Include revenue acceleration and risk mitigation, not just cost savings
Create Feedback Loops: Regular retrospectives on AI effectiveness
At Opsera (https://opsera.io), a comprehensive, multi-dimensional approach to measuring AI's true impact on software development that goes far beyond superficial metrics to reveal genuine value creation and we see large enterprises with 20K+ developers to 100+ developers they are able to measure the value and impact of AI with ROI and Developer experience.