> We must think about productivity both in the short term and the long term; for example, we need to understand the effects that biases against underrepresented groups have on developer productivity in terms of getting code submitted and also on retaining skilled employees by treating them fairly and affording them the same opportunities that others enjoy.
There's many issues with "human-centered" anything. Mostly on the idea that we "start with people", but we don't realize our own flaws as humans. Humans have finite willpower and creativity. They acknowledge that but still continue on persisting that this problem can be solved. It can't.
So we're trying to measure how much we produce when we should be measuring how efficient or effective we are with that finiteness. Again, quite a relative and impossible task.
The object isn't to make something (i.e. be productive). It is to be in that wonderful state in which making something is inevitable.
No metric or metric framework is going to help you here. There is no single proven "artist way" to do this either. Everyone has different routines and approaches to their creative finiteness.
Attrition is especially harmful at any company because you lose a flavor of creativity giving other creators perspective on how to create as budding artists. You can't really replace it easily and it takes time to mature in your talent.
Personally I think chasing an answer to these problems is a fool's errand. Many before have tried and failed. Not everything in life needs to be measured or improved. Especially something like creativity where it already is pretty much magic.