{"id":7251,"date":"2026-07-17T03:43:03","date_gmt":"2026-07-17T03:43:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/?p=7251"},"modified":"2026-07-17T03:43:06","modified_gmt":"2026-07-17T03:43:06","slug":"how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/","title":{"rendered":"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption"},"content":{"rendered":"<header class=\"Hero c-default tc-white bc-alto bc2-white pt-default pb-default mt-none mb-none bi bp-cc bpm-cc\" style=\"background-image: url('\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/Ai-Code-review.png'); position: relative; background-size: cover; background-position: center; z-index: 100;\" alt=\"AI-Code-review\">\n    <div class=\"overlay\" style=\"position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; background-color: rgba(51, 51, 51, 0.5); z-index: 50;\"><\/div>\n    <div class=\"container\" style=\"position: relative; z-index: 200;\">\n        <div class=\"Hero__inner\">\n            <div class=\"row\">\n                <div class=\"col-lg-8\">\n                    <div class=\"Heading\">\n                        <h1 class=\"Heading__title fs-default\" style=\"text-shadow: 2px 2px 6px rgba(0,0,0,0.7);\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\tHow to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/h1>\n                    <\/div>\n<div class=\"Heading__description fs-s30\">\n                             \n                     \n<\/div>\n                <\/div>\n            <\/div>\n        <\/div>\n    <\/div>\n<\/header>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column pt-5 is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">If you can\u2019t measure AI productivity, you can\u2019t justify the spend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">Many engineering teams now use AI coding assistants, automated code review tools, test generation tools, documentation support, and early agentic development workflows. The promise is clear: faster delivery, less repetitive work, and better developer productivity. But leadership needs more than adoption charts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">A dashboard showing active users, prompt volume, accepted suggestions, or generated lines of code does not prove that engineering productivity improved. For CTOs and CFOs, the real question is whether AI adoption has changed delivery speed, software quality, release reliability, engineering cost, and business output.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">AI adoption does not automatically mean better productivity. A team may generate more code and open more pull requests, but if defects increase, review time grows, or production incidents rise, the business has not gained much. To measure engineering productivity after AI adoption properly, leaders need to look at the engineering system, not only the tool.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"container wp-block-heading\"><strong>1. Why Is Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption So Complex to Track?<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"container\">\n<div class=\"info-box mt-4 mb-4\">\n  <h3><i>Separating High Tool Volume from Actual Delivery Returns<\/i><\/h3>\n  <p>\n\tEmbedding automated tools into an enterprise workflow instantly inflates the volume of raw text and digital activity passing through your development channels. This explosion of machine-generated code makes a software system harder to analyze because traditional tracking models cannot separate human ingenuity from automated repetition. To understand your actual operational returns, technology leaders must look past simple creation metrics to evaluate how efficiently changes flow through the entire system into production.\n  <\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<style>\n.info-box {\n\n border-left: 6px solid #2d4f8b !important; \n  background-color: #eef3fb;\n  padding: 15px;\n  font-family: \"Times New Roman\", serif;\n}\n\n.info-box h3 {\n  color: #2d4f8b;\n  font-size: 18px;\n  margin: 0 0 10px 0;\n}\n\n.info-box p {\n  color: #333;\n  font-size: 15px;\n  margin: 0;\n  line-height: 1.5;\n}\n<\/style>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">AI can make engineering teams look busier. It can increase code output, test drafts, documentation, pull request volume, and review comments. These signals may look positive at first, but they do not always prove that meaningful work is moving faster. The real challenge is separating activity from value.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">A developer may use AI to generate code quickly, but that code still needs review, testing, security checks, integration, and deployment. If the downstream process cannot absorb the extra volume, the bottleneck simply moves from coding to review, QA, DevOps, or production support.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">This is why measuring engineering productivity after AI adoption should not be done by relying on one metric. The<a href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/search?q=https:\/\/www.microsoft.com\/en-us\/research\/publication\/the-space-of-developer-productivity\/\">\u00a0<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/space-framework.com\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>SPACE framework<\/u><\/a> is useful here because it treats developer productivity as a multi-dimensional concept, including satisfaction, performance, activity, communication, and efficiency. That matters because productivity is not only about output. It is also about flow, quality, focus, collaboration, and whether teams can deliver value without increasing risk. AI productivity should be measured by improvements in the engineering system, not by how much AI is used.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"container wp-block-heading\"><strong><strong>2. Why Usage Charts Fail to Reveal Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"container\">\n<div class=\"info-box mt-4 mb-4\">\n  <h3><i>Moving Beyond Vendor Dashboards to Business Outcomes<\/i><\/h3>\n  <p>\n\tRelying on vendor-provided activity logs to measure technology returns creates a significant blind spot for financial auditors. Active user counts, token consumption rates, and accepted recommendation metrics are early indicators of human engagement, not proof of financial return. To justify ongoing corporate investments, executives must shift their perspective from monitoring tool utilization to validating systemic software delivery performance\n  <\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<style>\n.info-box {\n\n border-left: 6px solid #2d4f8b !important; \n  background-color: #eef3fb;\n  padding: 15px;\n  font-family: \"Times New Roman\", serif;\n}\n\n.info-box h3 {\n  color: #2d4f8b;\n  font-size: 18px;\n  margin: 0 0 10px 0;\n}\n\n.info-box p {\n  color: #333;\n  font-size: 15px;\n  margin: 0;\n  line-height: 1.5;\n}\n<\/style>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">Usage metrics are easy to collect, so many companies start there. They track AI tool licenses activated, daily active users, prompt volume, accepted suggestions, lines of code generated, numbers of AI-generated tests, and developer satisfaction scores. These numbers are useful as adoption signals, showing whether teams are trying the tools. But they do not prove ROI.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">For CFOs, high tool usage is not a business outcome. For CTOs, generated code is not the same as reliable software delivery. A team can accept thousands of AI suggestions and still see no improvement in release speed, quality, or cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">If leadership cannot answer whether teams are deploying more often, or if lead time is decreasing, the organization is simply measuring AI activity instead of true software engineering productivity.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"container wp-block-heading\"><strong><strong><strong>3. A Balanced 5-Pillar Model to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"container\">\n<div class=\"info-box mt-4 mb-4\">\n  <h3><i>Aligning System Health with Hard Corporate Performance<\/i><\/h3>\n  <p>\n\tTo evaluate the true return of automated tooling without falling into technical debt, enterprises must measure the entire software pipeline rather than individual developer typing speed. This structural framework organizes telemetry around five core pillars: speed, quality, reliability, financial cost, and developer experience. By tracking these areas as an interconnected system, leadership can ensure that automated delivery velocity never compromises application safety.\n\n  <\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<style>\n.info-box {\n\n border-left: 6px solid #2d4f8b !important; \n  background-color: #eef3fb;\n  padding: 15px;\n  font-family: \"Times New Roman\", serif;\n}\n\n.info-box h3 {\n  color: #2d4f8b;\n  font-size: 18px;\n  margin: 0 0 10px 0;\n}\n\n.info-box p {\n  color: #333;\n  font-size: 15px;\n  margin: 0;\n  line-height: 1.5;\n}\n<\/style>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns container pb-5 pt-5 is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large d-flex  justify-content-center m-3\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"768\" src=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1-1024x768.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-7253\" title=\"A Balanced 5-Pillar Model to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption\" srcset=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1-1024x768.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1-300x225.jpg 300w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1-768x576.jpg 768w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1-16x12.jpg 16w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1-400x300.jpg 400w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/5-core-pillars-1.jpg 1448w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column container is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"container pt-1 wp-block-paragraph\">To measure engineering productivity after AI adoption, CTOs and CFOs need a balanced framework. A useful model has five pillars:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"container pt-1 wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Speed:<\/strong> Are teams shipping faster?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Quality:<\/strong> Are teams shipping better software?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Reliability:<\/strong> Is production more stable?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Cost:<\/strong> Is engineering output more efficient?<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Developer Experience:<\/strong> Are developers less blocked and more effective?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">These pillars should be read together. Speed without quality creates risk. Quality without speed may slow business growth. Low cost without reliability can create hidden remediation expenses. Good developer experience without measurable delivery improvement may not justify the investment. The point is to measure whether AI helps the engineering organization deliver better software faster and at a cost the business can defend.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column container is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong><strong>4. Core Speed and Flow Metrics to Evaluate Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The first major component of system evaluation focuses on the speed and flow of your software delivery pipeline. If automation is truly optimizing your engineering workflows, the positive impact must be visible across four standard metrics:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 1: Deployment Frequency<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Deployment frequency measures how often teams release changes to production or end users. After AI adoption, this metric can show whether teams are able to move smaller changes through the pipeline more often. If AI helps developers complete simple tasks faster, write tests sooner, or reduce repetitive work, deployment frequency may improve.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Deployment frequency is useful because it shows whether the delivery pipeline can absorb AI-assisted development. If AI helps developers write code faster but deployment frequency does not change, the bottleneck may be review, testing, CI\/CD, product approval, or release governance. <a href=\"https:\/\/cd.foundation\/blog\/2025\/10\/16\/dora-5-metrics\/\"><u>DORA\u2019s metrics<\/u><\/a> are commonly used to evaluate software delivery performance, including deployment frequency and lead time for changes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 2: Lead Time for Changes<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Lead time for changes measures how long it takes for a code change to move from commit to production. This is one of the best metrics for measuring AI productivity because it captures the full delivery flow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">AI may reduce coding time, but that is only one part of the process. A change still needs to go through review, testing, security checks, CI\/CD, release approval, and deployment. If these steps remain slow, the total lead time may not improve. For example, an assistant may help a developer finish a task two hours faster. But if the pull request waits two days for review, another day for QA, and another day for release approval, the business impact is small. If AI reduces coding time but lead time stays the same, the bottleneck has moved somewhere else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 3: Developer Velocity<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Developer velocity is often misunderstood. It should not mean lines of code per developer. That metric is weak, especially after AI adoption. More code can mean more complexity, more review work, and more maintenance cost. Better velocity indicators include completed meaningful work items, story throughput, issue cycle time, reduced blocker time, and faster delivery of small features.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The goal of AI-assisted development is not to make developers type more. It is to help teams move valuable work through the system with less friction. Engineering managers should also avoid turning productivity measurement into individual surveillance, which damages trust. Velocity should be used to improve the system, not to pressure people into generating more code.<\/p>\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-full\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1000\" height=\"667\" src=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/developer-velocity-1.jpg\" alt=\"Well Developer Velocity\" class=\"wp-image-7254\" srcset=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/developer-velocity-1.jpg 1000w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/developer-velocity-1-300x200.jpg 300w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/developer-velocity-1-768x512.jpg 768w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/developer-velocity-1-18x12.jpg 18w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1000px) 100vw, 1000px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 4: Pull Request Cycle Time and Review Burden<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">AI coding tools can increase the number of pull requests. That is not automatically bad, but it can create a new bottleneck if review capacity does not improve. Senior engineers may spend more time reviewing, correcting, and securing AI-assisted changes, making the individual developer feel faster while the team becomes slower.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Track pull request open-to-merge time, average review time, number of review rounds, senior reviewer workload, and rework after review. This helps answer an important question: Did AI reduce engineering friction, or did it shift the work to reviewers? A healthy program should reduce low-value review work. It should not flood senior engineers with more low-quality pull requests.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column container is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>5. Quality, Stability, and Cost Indicators of Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The second major component of system tracking balances delivery speed against structural safety, operational stability, and financial discipline:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 5: Quality and Defect Escape Rate<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Speed without quality is not productivity. If AI helps teams ship faster but more defects reach production, the organization has only moved cost from development into operations, support, and customer remediation. Quality metrics should include the defect escape rate, production bugs, reopened tickets, rework rate, customer-reported issues, failed tests, and security vulnerabilities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">AI tools can generate tests quickly, but generated tests can be shallow. A test file may increase coverage numbers without catching important edge cases. That is why teams should measure whether tests improve confidence, not only whether more tests exist. For CTOs, this metric protects engineering quality. For CFOs, it protects hidden costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 6: Change Failure Rate and Recovery Time<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Change failure rate measures the percentage of deployments that cause production failures, require hotfixes, or trigger rollbacks. Recovery time measures how quickly the team can restore service after a failure. These metrics matter because AI-assisted development can increase the speed and volume of changes. If the delivery system is mature, this can be positive. If not, faster changes can create instability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Track change failure rates, rollback frequencies, hotfix volumes, incident counts, and mean time to repair service (MTTR). A team that deploys more often but causes more incidents is not necessarily more productive. The target is faster and safer delivery. This is where DevOps maturity matters. AI adoption should be supported by strong CI\/CD, automated testing, observability, and rollback mechanisms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Metric 7: Cost per Engineering Outcome<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This is the CFO\u2019s core question. AI tools create costs, including software licenses, cloud usage, inference costs, integration work, training, review effort, and rework. The question is whether these costs improve meaningful outcomes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Useful financial metrics include cost per delivered feature, cost per release, cost per resolved ticket, and cost per production-ready change. CFOs should not only ask how many developers use AI. They should ask whether the cost per engineering outcome has improved. If AI spending rises but lead time, quality, reliability, and delivery output stay flat, the AI adoption ROI is difficult to justify.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"container wp-block-heading\"><strong>6. Common Mistakes When Evaluating Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns container pb-5 pt-5 is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column container is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The biggest mistake is treating AI productivity as an individual typing-speed problem. In enterprise software, productivity is a system-level outcome. Avoid these common mistakes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Measuring lines of code:<\/strong> More code is not always better. It may increase complexity and maintenance cost.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Treating AI usage as value:<\/strong> Active users and prompt volume show adoption, not business impact.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Ignoring review burden:<\/strong> AI may shift work from coding to senior review.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Counting test quantity instead of test quality:<\/strong> More tests do not always mean better coverage or stronger confidence.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Focusing only on individual developers:<\/strong> Software delivery is a team system. Over-measuring individuals can create unhealthy behavior.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Ignoring hidden costs:<\/strong> License fees are only part of the cost. Review, rework, infrastructure, and monitoring also matter.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong>Measuring speed without reliability:<\/strong> Fast delivery with more failures is not productivity.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\"><div class=\"wp-block-image\">\n<figure class=\"aligncenter size-large\" id=\"Evaluating-Engineering-Productivity-After-AI-Adoption\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1024\" height=\"494\" src=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1-1024x494.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-7255\" srcset=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1-1024x494.jpg 1024w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1-300x145.jpg 300w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1-768x371.jpg 768w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1-1536x741.jpg 1536w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1-18x9.jpg 18w, https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/evaluating-productivity-1.jpg 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px\" \/><\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column container is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong><strong><strong><strong>7. A Practical Dashboard for Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A useful dashboard should be simple enough for leadership to read and detailed enough for engineering teams to act on. Each AI use case should have its own owner, baseline, target, cost, risk level, and decision status.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"table-wrapper container mb-5 pb-5\">\n    <table class=\"model-table\">\n        <thead>\n            <tr>\n                <th style=\"width: 20%;\">Category<\/th>\n                <th>Metric<\/th>\n                <th>Why It Matters<\/th>\n            <\/tr>\n        <\/thead>\n\n        <tbody>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Speed<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Deployment frequency<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Shows whether teams can release more often<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Speed<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Lead time for changes<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Shows whether ideas reach production faster<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Flow<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Pull request cycle time<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Reveals review and merge bottlenecks<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Quality<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Defect escape rate<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Shows whether quality is improving<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Reliability<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Change failure rate<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Measures stability of releases<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Reliability<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Recovery time<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Shows how quickly teams recover<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Cost<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Cost per feature or release<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Helps CFOs assess ROI<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>People<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Developer experience<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Shows whether AI reduces friction<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n\t\t\t\n            <tr>\n                <td><strong>Governance<\/strong><\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Security findings and exceptions<\/td>\n                <td style=\"background-color:#fff;\">Shows whether risk is controlled<\/td>\n            <\/tr>\n        <\/tbody>\n    <\/table>\n<\/div>\n\n<style>\n\n.model-table {\n    width: 100%;\n    border-collapse: collapse;\n    table-layout: fixed;\n    border: 1px solid #333;\n}\n\n.model-table th {\n    background: #c7d3ee;\n    color: #111;\n    border: 1px solid #333;\n    padding: 8px 10px;\n    text-align: left;\n    font-size: 16px;\n    font-weight: 700;\n}\n.model-table td:first-child {\n    width: 100px;\n    font-weight: 700;\n}\n.model-table td {\n    background: #f6e3c5;\n    border: 1px solid #333;\n    padding: 20px;\n    vertical-align: top;\n    color: #111;\n    font-size: 15px;\n    line-height: 1.35;\n}\n<\/style>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This dashboard should be reviewed by engineering, product, finance, and security together. AI productivity is not owned by one function. It sits at the intersection of delivery, cost, risk, and business value.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"container wp-block-heading\"><strong><strong>8. Cross-Border Risk Maps: Protecting Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption<\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"container\">\n<div class=\"info-box mt-4 mb-4\">\n  <h3><iAligning Technical Output Tracking with Regional Trust Tiers<\/i><\/h3>\n  <p>For cross-border engineering teams, measuring engineering productivity metrics is not simply a localized operational task; it is deeply tied to cross-border risk management and regional trust compliance. Organizations operating across diverse international jurisdictions require unified tracking standards that prove that an increase in software delivery speed does not weaken data protection, application auditability, or customer security boundaries.\n  <\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<style>\n.info-box {\n\n border-left: 6px solid #2d4f8b !important; \n  background-color: #eef3fb;\n  padding: 15px;\n  font-family: \"Times New Roman\", serif;\n}\n\n.info-box h3 {\n  color: #2d4f8b;\n  font-size: 18px;\n  margin: 0 0 10px 0;\n}\n\n.info-box p {\n  color: #333;\n  font-size: 15px;\n  margin: 0;\n  line-height: 1.5;\n}\n<\/style>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">For cross-border engineering teams, measuring AI productivity is not only about proving speed. It is also about proving that faster delivery does not weaken software quality, security, auditability, or customer trust. This matters especially for companies serving Switzerland, the EU, the UK, and the US, where software may support financial services, healthcare, telecom, insurance, enterprise SaaS, or public-sector-related workflows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">Swiss companies often operate in trust-heavy sectors where operational resilience and data protection matter under strict <a href=\"https:\/\/www.finma.ch\/en\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>FINMA<\/u><\/a> oversight. EU-facing teams must consider data protection and AI governance expectations. Operating anywhere within the European market means aligning with the strict regulatory boundaries of the<a href=\"https:\/\/digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu\/en\/policies\/regulatory-framework-artificial-intelligence\">\u00a0<\/a><a href=\"https:\/\/artificialintelligenceact.eu\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>EU AI Act<\/u><\/a>, which enforces strict compliance models for high-risk applications. US and UK companies may move faster in tool adoption, but they still face customer, board, and sector-specific security pressure. For these teams, AI productivity measurement should include quality, reliability, security findings, review discipline, and auditability.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"container wp-block-heading\"><strong><strong><strong>9. How IMT Solutions Can Support AI Productivity Measurement and System Optimization<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">Measuring engineering productivity after AI adoption requires more than a dashboard. It requires a mature software delivery workflow, DevOps discipline, testing capability, secure development practices, and a clear view of how work moves from idea to production.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\"><a href=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>IMT Solutions<\/u><\/a> acts as a trusted software engineering and digital transformation partner, helping enterprises approach automation through strict technical discipline, Agile infrastructure, and ISO 27001-certified security requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"container wp-block-paragraph\">If your engineering team has adopted AI tools but leadership still cannot see measurable outcomes, the issue may not be the tool itself. It may be the system around the tool. An independent productivity review can help your leadership team optimize <a href=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/services\/devops-consulting\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>DevOps<\/u><\/a> workflows, improve automated testing coverage, mitigate technical debt, and establish real value verification before you scale spending further. Explore our latest engineering insights in <a href=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/company\/blogs\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>Blogs \u2013 IMT Solutions<\/u><\/a>, analyze our live delivery history in <a href=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/company\/case-studies\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>Case Studies \u2013 IMT Solutions<\/u><\/a>, or connect with our platform specialists at <a href=\"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/contact\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><u>Contact IMT Solutions<\/u><\/a> to advance your software lifecycle with absolute confidence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-8f761849 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column container is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>10. Final Thoughts on Measuring the Engineering System, Not Just AI Tool Usage<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">AI adoption can help engineering teams move faster, but only if the system around developers improves. CTOs and CFOs should not rely on usage metrics alone. Deployment frequency, lead time, developer velocity, pull request cycle time, defect escape rate, change failure rate, recovery time, cost, and developer experience all matter.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The goal is not to prove that developers are using AI. The goal is to prove that AI helps the organization deliver better software faster, safer, and at a cost the business can justify. If you can\u2019t measure AI productivity, you can\u2019t justify the spend.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>FAQ<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>How do you measure engineering productivity after AI adoption?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Measure engineering productivity after AI adoption through a balanced view of delivery speed, software quality, release reliability, cost, and developer experience. Useful metrics include deployment frequency, lead time for changes, pull request cycle time, defect escape rate, change failure rate, recovery time, and cost per engineering outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Is AI tool usage a good productivity metric?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">AI tool usage is a useful adoption signal, but it is not a productivity metric by itself. Active users, prompt volume, or accepted suggestions do not prove that software delivery improved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>What are the best metrics for AI developer productivity?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Good metrics include lead time for changes, deployment frequency, PR cycle time, review burden, defect rate, rework rate, change failure rate, recovery time, developer experience, and cost per delivered feature or release.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Should companies measure lines of code after AI adoption?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">No. Lines of code is usually a weak productivity metric. More code can increase complexity, review burden, and long-term maintenance cost. Engineering leaders should measure delivered value and software quality instead.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>How should CFOs evaluate AI coding tool ROI?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">CFOs should compare the full cost of AI tools, including licenses, cloud usage, integration, review effort, rework, and remediation, against measurable improvements in delivery speed, quality, cost per feature, and business output.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>How does deployment frequency show AI productivity?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Deployment frequency can show whether teams are able to release more often after AI adoption. However, it should always be read together with quality and reliability metrics to ensure faster delivery does not create more failures.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption If you can\u2019t measure AI productivity, you can\u2019t justify the spend. Many engineering teams now use AI coding assistants, automated code review tools, test generation tools, documentation support, and early agentic development workflows. The promise is clear: faster delivery, less repetitive work, and better developer productivity. But leadership needs more than adoption charts. A dashboard showing active users, prompt volume, accepted suggestions, or generated lines of code does not prove that engineering productivity improved. For CTOs and CFOs, the real question is whether AI adoption has changed delivery speed, software quality, release reliability, engineering cost, and business output. AI adoption does not [&hellip;]<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":7252,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_mi_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[331,9],"tags":[481,487,478,459,484,489,482,488,477,490,475,480,486,483,476,485,479],"class_list":["post-7251","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-ai","category-latest","tag-ai-adoption-roi","tag-ai-coding-tools-roi","tag-ai-developer-productivity","tag-ai-assisted-software-development","tag-change-failure-rate","tag-code-quality-metrics","tag-deployment-frequency","tag-developer-experience","tag-developer-productivity-metrics","tag-devops-metrics","tag-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption","tag-engineering-productivity-metrics","tag-engineering-roi","tag-lead-time-for-changes","tag-measure-engineering-productivity","tag-software-delivery-metrics","tag-software-engineering-productivity"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v20.9 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption - IMT Solutions<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"If you can\u2019t measure Engineering productivity after AI adoption, you can\u2019t justify the spend. See how CTOs, CFOs track deployment quality, security, velocity, and AI ROI.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"ja_JP\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption - IMT Solutions\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"If you can\u2019t measure Engineering productivity after AI adoption, you can\u2019t justify the spend. See how CTOs, CFOs track deployment quality, security, velocity, and AI ROI.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"IMT Solutions\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/IMTSolutions\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-07-17T03:43:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-07-17T03:43:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/how-to-measure-engineering-1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"600\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"IMT Solutions\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@imtsolutions\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@imtsolutions\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u57f7\u7b46\u8005\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"IMT Solutions\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"\u63a8\u5b9a\u8aad\u307f\u53d6\u308a\u6642\u9593\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"14\u5206\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/\",\"name\":\"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption - IMT Solutions\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-07-17T03:43:03+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-07-17T03:43:06+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#\/schema\/person\/24a4128fc0841f71761c07069fc6e1e7\"},\"description\":\"If you can\u2019t measure Engineering productivity after AI adoption, you can\u2019t justify the spend. See how CTOs, CFOs track deployment quality, security, velocity, and AI ROI.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"ja\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/\",\"name\":\"IMT Solutions\",\"description\":\"Trusted IT Outsourcing Provider\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"ja\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#\/schema\/person\/24a4128fc0841f71761c07069fc6e1e7\",\"name\":\"IMT Solutions\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"ja\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9cebd13eb320e8d739fc69f9fb74a1024264e7a29480d6714d311f6271c4070e?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9cebd13eb320e8d739fc69f9fb74a1024264e7a29480d6714d311f6271c4070e?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"IMT Solutions\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\/\/localhost:8787\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption - IMT Solutions","description":"If you can\u2019t measure Engineering productivity after AI adoption, you can\u2019t justify the spend. See how CTOs, CFOs track deployment quality, security, velocity, and AI ROI.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/","og_locale":"ja_JP","og_type":"article","og_title":"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption - IMT Solutions","og_description":"If you can\u2019t measure Engineering productivity after AI adoption, you can\u2019t justify the spend. See how CTOs, CFOs track deployment quality, security, velocity, and AI ROI.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/","og_site_name":"IMT Solutions","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/IMTSolutions\/","article_published_time":"2026-07-17T03:43:03+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-07-17T03:43:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":800,"height":600,"url":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/how-to-measure-engineering-1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"IMT Solutions","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@imtsolutions","twitter_site":"@imtsolutions","twitter_misc":{"\u57f7\u7b46\u8005":"IMT Solutions","\u63a8\u5b9a\u8aad\u307f\u53d6\u308a\u6642\u9593":"14\u5206"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/","url":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/","name":"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption - IMT Solutions","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-07-17T03:43:03+00:00","dateModified":"2026-07-17T03:43:06+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#\/schema\/person\/24a4128fc0841f71761c07069fc6e1e7"},"description":"If you can\u2019t measure Engineering productivity after AI adoption, you can\u2019t justify the spend. See how CTOs, CFOs track deployment quality, security, velocity, and AI ROI.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"ja","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.imtpm.com\/en\/2026\/07\/17\/how-to-measure-engineering-productivity-after-ai-adoption\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"How to Measure Engineering Productivity After AI Adoption"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#website","url":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/","name":"IMT Solutions","description":"Trusted IT Outsourcing Provider","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"ja"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#\/schema\/person\/24a4128fc0841f71761c07069fc6e1e7","name":"IMT Solutions","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"ja","@id":"https:\/\/m.imt-soft.com\/ja\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9cebd13eb320e8d739fc69f9fb74a1024264e7a29480d6714d311f6271c4070e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9cebd13eb320e8d739fc69f9fb74a1024264e7a29480d6714d311f6271c4070e?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"IMT Solutions"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/localhost:8787"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7251","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=7251"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7251\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7257,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/7251\/revisions\/7257"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/7252"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=7251"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=7251"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/imt-soft.com\/ja\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=7251"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}