I worked at a company once where management had a very elaborate system in place for tracking progress and productivity - almost entirely based on change control and bug reports items. It was a dismal failure:
eg. You might have a programmer who had to deal with a very obscure and difficult to reproduce bug, and as such just resolved just "1 item" all week. On the flipside, someone else might have been working on relatively easy items, and resolved "20 items" in the same week. Superficially this looks like the second programmer was "20 times more productive".
Now, to be fair, none of this was actually directly used to reward or punish people per se. Our management was technical enough to understand that the above scenario can happen. But still, given that the metrics are in place, it just tended to psychologically look and feel bad when you spent forever on something. And certain products and codebases at the company tended to generate more nasty bugs than others - or the work was more predictable than on others. So in the end, all this did was cause people to get demotivated when their "numbers" didn't look as good as other groups' or programmers' numbers.