Recent research from Stanford University has identified a subset of software engineers, referred to as “ghost engineers,” who contribute minimally to their organisations. The study, led by Yegor Denisov-Blanch, analysed data from over 50,000 engineers across hundreds of companies, revealing that approximately 9.5% of these professionals perform less than 10% of the work compared to their median peers.
As detailed in a post by Denisov-Blanch on X (formerly Twitter), these underperforming engineers could be costing companies billions annually. Denisov-Blanch noted that some of these individuals might be holding multiple jobs simultaneously, further impacting productivity and team dynamics.
The study used an algorithm designed to automate aspects of code review, evaluating coding time, implementation speed, and code complexity. This approach provided a detailed look into productivity metrics within the software engineering field.
However, these findings come amid reports of widespread burnout among software developers. Studies indicate that nearly half of developers are experiencing burnout, leading to increased use of mental health resources and financial implications for businesses.
The concept of “ghost engineers” has sparked debate within the tech industry about the fairness and effectiveness of current performance metrics. While the Stanford study highlights underperformance, it also raises questions about how organisations should balance individual assessments with broader team contributions.
