Code Climate was founded in 2011 by engineering leaders who were frustrated by the lack of visibility into data that would enable them to make informed improvements. Today, engineering executives from Fortune 100 companies in industries such as Hospitality, Healthcare, Retail, and Technology partner with Code Climate to tackle critical business challenges. Through our personalized approach, expert guidance, and a custom-designed Software Engineering Intelligence (SEI) platform, Code Climate delivers tailored, actionable insights that empower engineering executives to make data-driven decisions.

Website

https://codeclimate.com/

External link for Code Climate

Industry

Software Development

Company size

11-50 employees

Headquarters

New York, NY

Type

Privately Held

Founded

2011

Specialties

software development, GenAI Impact, Developer Productivity, Developer Experience, Engineering Leadership, and Enterprise-capabilities

• Primary

  New York, NY 10007, US

  Get directions

• Albert Wenger

  Managing Partner at Union Square Ventures

• John D. McCarthy

  Fractional CFO, Coach and Board Member for VC/PE-backed companies

• David Beisel

  Co-Founder & Partner at NextView Ventures

• Josh Knowles

  CEO, Code Climate

• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  1w Edited

  • Report this post

  Treating Software Engineering Insights as a ProductByAndrew GassenSoftware engineering data shouldn’t be collected for the sake of having it—it should serve a clear purpose: helping specific users achieve specific outcomes. Whether for engineering leadership, product teams, or executive stakeholders, high-performing organizations ensure that engineering insights are:>Relevant – Focused on what each audience actually needs to know.>Actionable – Providing clear next steps, not just numbers.>Timely – Delivered at the right moment to drive decisions.Rather than relying on pre-built dashboards with generic engineering metrics, mature organizations customize reporting to align with team priorities and business objectives. Learn more on our new blog 🔗👇#engineeringleadership#engineeringmanagement#engineeringinsights

  …more

  4 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  1w

  • Report this post

  Shifting from Tactical Engineering Metrics to StrategyByAndrew GassenThere are many frameworks, methodologies, and metrics often referenced as critical to the engineering insights conversation. While these can be useful, they are not inherently valuable on their own. Why? Because it all comes down to strategy. Focusing on managing a specific engineering metric or framework (i.e. DORA or SPACE) is missing the forest for the trees. Our most successful customers have a clear, defined, and well-communicated strategy for their software engineering insights program—one that doesn’t focus on metrics by name. Why? Because unless an engineering metric is mapped to something meaningful to the business, it lacks the context to be impactful.Strategic engineering leaders at large organizations focus on business-driven questions, such as:>Is this engineering investment improving customer experience?>Are we accelerating revenue growth?>Is this new approach or tool improving cross-functional collaboration?Learn more on our blog 🔗👇#engineeringleadership#engineeringmanagement#engineeringinsights

  …more

  6 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  1w

  • Report this post

  The Value of Code is Not the CodeByAndrew GassenMany software engineering organizations focus primarily on code-related metrics, but writing code is just one small piece of the larger business value stream—and rarely the area with the greatest opportunities for improvement. Optimizing code creation can create a false sense of progress at best and, at worst, introduce unintended bottlenecks that negatively impact the broader system.High-performing engineering organizations recognize this risk and instead measure the effectiveness of the entire system when evaluating the impact of changes and decisions. Instead of focusing solely on PR cycle time or commit activity, top-performing teams assess the entire journey.For example, reducing code review time by a few hours may seem like an efficiency win, but if completed code sits for six weeks before deployment, that improvement has little real impact. While this may sound intuitive, in practice, it’s far more complicated—especially in matrixed or hierarchical organizations, where different teams own different parts of the system. In these environments, it’s often difficult, though not impossible, for one group to influence or improve a process owned by another.Learn more on our blog 🔗👇#engineeringleadership#engineeringmanagement#engineeringinsights

  …more

  3 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  1mo

  • Report this post

  This week, we’ve celebrated an incredible 10-year work anniversary for Code Climate's Technical Product Specialist,Emily Fueger! 🥇Her dedication and expertise continues to have a major impact on our team.At the same time, we’re thrilled to welcome 3 amazing new Cli-mates:1.Jen Handler - Head of Professional Services2.Adi David - Analytics Engineer 3.Nicholas Lorentzen - Analytics EngineerHere’s to growth, collaboration, and continued success.#WorkAnniversary#Teamwork#SoftwareEngineering

  38 4 Comments

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  2mo

  • Report this post

  The Code Cli-mates had an 🪓 axe-cellent time bonding and sharpening our skills at axe throwing. It turns out, aiming for the target (whether on the board or in business) is way more fun when you're doing it as a team. We're bringing this focus and energy back to the office as we gear up for our next chapter. Stay tuned!Huge shoutout toAudrey Anjos-Klepper for making it an unforgettable experience.#TeamBonding#EngineeringExcellence

  24 3 Comments

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  6mo Edited

  • Report this post

  The promises associated with the following technologies seem straightforward:>Generative AI aims to accelerate, improve quality, and reduce costs.>No-code and Low-code platforms promise faster and cheaper software development accessible to anyone.>Software Engineering Intelligence (SEI) platforms such as Code Climate enhance productivity measurement for informed decisions leading to faster, efficient, and higher-quality outcomes.However, the reality isn’t as straightforward as the messaging may seem:>Adopting Generative AI alone can lead to building the wrong things faster.>No-code or Low-code tools are efficient until you hit inherent limitations, forcing cumbersome workarounds that reduce maintainability and create new challenges compared to native code development.>As for SEI platforms, as we've observed with our customers, simply displaying data isn't effective if you lack the strategies to leverage it.While the potential of these technologies is compelling, it's critical to address and understand their practical implications. Often, business or non-technical stakeholders embrace the promises while engineering leaders, responsible for implementation, grapple with the complex realities.Learn more on our blog.#genAI#engineeringleadership#engineeringmanagement

  5 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  7mo

  • Report this post

  What Causes a High Number of Review Cycle?A high number of Review Cycles in engineering might stem from a combination of challenges that hinder the efficiency of the process. These include differing interpretations of what constitutes "done," misalignment between the expected changes and the actual changes resulting from the review, or conflicting views on the best approach to implement a solution. If there are anomalies where Review Cycles are high for a particular submitter, it could indicate they’re struggling with the codebase or aren’t clear about the requirements. This presents an opportunity for leadership to provide individualized coaching to help the submitter improve the quality of their code.The first step in addressing a high number of Review Cycles is to identify the reason PRs are being passed back and forth, which requires both quantitative and qualitative information. By looking at Review Cycles alongside other PR metrics, leaders can look for correlations. For example, Review Cycles tend to be high when PR Size is high. If this is true in your organization, it might be necessary to re-emphasize coding best practices and encourage keeping PRs small.Leaders might also want to do a closer review of PR data to understand which PRs have the highest Review Cycles. They can bring this information to the teams working on those PRs to uncover what exactly is causing the PRs to bounce around in review. Maybe there’s a misalignment that can be worked through, or requirements are shifting while the project is in progress. Leaders can work with teams to find solutions to limit the number of times PRs are volleyed back and forth by establishing expectations for reviews, how solutions should be implemented, and when a review is complete. Best practices for the PR review process should be documented and referenced by all team members.Learn more on our blog. Link below👇#engineeringmanagement#engineeringleadership#engineeringmetrics

  3 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  7mo

  • Report this post

  Navigating New Technology Expectations and RealitiesSoftware engineering leaders now face increased pressure to achieve more with fewer resources, often under metrics that oversimplify their complex responsibilities. It's no secret that widespread layoffs have affected the technology industry in recent years. Despite this, the scope of their responsibilities and the outcomes expected from them by the business haven't diminished. In fact, with the adoption of new technologies, these expectations have only increased.Viewing software development solely in terms of the number of features produced overlooks critical aspects such as technical debt or the routine maintenance necessary to keep operations running smoothly. Adding to that, engineering leaders are increasingly pressured to solve non-engineering challenges within their domains. This disconnect between technical solutions and non-technical issues highlights a fundamental gap that can't be bridged by engineering alone—it requires buy-in and understanding from all stakeholders involved.This tension isn't new, but it's becoming front-and-center thanks to the promises of new technologies mentioned above. These promises create higher expectations for business leaders, which, in turn, trickle down to engineering leaders who are expected to navigate these challenges, which trickle down to the teams doing the work. Recently, a Code Climate Velocity customer was undergoing a significant adoption of GitHub Copilot, a powerful tool. This particular leader’s finance team told her, "We bought this new tool six months ago and you don't seem to be operating any better. What's going on?" This scenario reflects the challenges many large engineering organizations face.Learn more on our blog.

  5 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  7mo

  • Report this post

  Monthly Software Engineering Metrics to Understand Team PerformanceData-driven insights can provide engineering leaders with objective ways to evaluate developer competency, assess individual progress, and spot opportunities for improvement. While quarterly KPIs and annual performance reviews are great goalposts, managers are constantly thinking about how their teams are progressing toward those targets. Reviewing engineering metrics on a monthly basis is a good way to assess month-over-month progress and performance fluctuations on an individual level and a team level. Which metrics a team considers depends on its defined framework and overall company goals.Here are a few to consider:>PRs Merged vs. PRs ReviewedLooking at these metrics together can show how the two key responsibilities of writing and reviewing code are spread across a team.>Review Coverage vs. Review InfluenceThis helps leaders understand what amount of thoroughness of Code Reviews results in a desired action.>Review Cycles vs. Cycle TimeTo understand the effect that back-and-forth cycles in Code Review have on shipping speed, leaders can look at Review Cycles vs. Cycle Time.>Impact vs. ReworkComparing Impact and Rework will show which teams are making the most significant changes to the codebase and how efficiently they are doing so.Learn more on our blog.#engineeringmanagement#engineeringmetrics#engineeringleadership

  5 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share
• Code Climate

  4,512 followers

  7mo

  • Report this post

  What Causes a High Number of Review Cycle in Software Engineering?A high number of Review Cycles in software engineering might stem from a combination of challenges that hinder the efficiency of the process. These include differing interpretations of what constitutes "done," misalignment between the expected changes and the actual changes resulting from the review, or conflicting views on the best approach to implement a solution. If there are anomalies where Review Cycles are high for a particular submitter, it could indicate they’re struggling with the codebase or aren’t clear about the requirements. This presents an opportunity for leadership to provide individualized coaching to help the submitter improve the quality of their code.The first step in addressing a high number of Review Cycles is to identify the reason PRs are being passed back and forth, which requires both quantitative and qualitative information. By looking at Review Cycles alongside other PR metrics, leaders can look for correlations. For example, Review Cycles tend to be high when PR Size is high. If this is true in your organization, it might be necessary to re-emphasize coding best practices and encourage keeping PRs small.Leaders might also want to do a closer review of PR data to understand which PRs have the highest Review Cycles. They can bring this information to the teams working on those PRs to uncover what exactly is causing the PRs to bounce around in review. Maybe there’s a misalignment that can be worked through, or requirements are shifting while the project is in progress. Leaders can work with teams to find solutions to limit the number of times PRs are volleyed back and forth by establishing expectations for reviews, how solutions should be implemented, and when a review is complete. Best practices for the PR review process should be documented and referenced by all team members.Learn more on our blog.#reviewcycles#engineeringmanagement#engineeringleadership

  6 1 Comment

  Like Comment Share