I feel like this is partially getting into a technical vs social problem where if you're tracking peoples' "new LoC writte, existing LoC edited, number of commits per day, comments per PR on other people" type of stuff you end up with bullshit artists optimising for maximum analytics impact, good devs being penalised for "slacking off", and all sorts of other crap that comes with trying to optimise for these effects.

It's kind of like how in a proper team where there is already trust and no micromanagement, everyone continues to do their work and remain productive no matter what, while often in a team where management does not care about ICs and treats them as disposable, and the they only show up for an income, are hourly, or just churn out crap in volume, they're gonna slack off as soon as your back is turned.

It entirely depends on their use, ask the team(s) involved first, and the level of trust. You'll be strung out to hang if your team already doesn't trust you and now you want to throw this "surveillance watchdog garbage" at them.

If your team trusts you as management, you may get some kind of buy-in as to how some graphs may help them work smarter, but at that point it's likely something they don't _need_, and if you start forcing value judgements off that data there's a high chance they're going to resent you for it.