The whole article hinges on the lines of code metric being an accurate metric for how productive a team is. But how many programmers would be happy if their bosses paid them per line of code?
I would be inclined to agree with the premise of the article, but the evidence given is flawed at best.
No kidding. Sure feels like bending the statistic to fit your argument. I will concede that larger teams are less cost effective and the cost goes up exponentially compared to productivity as the team gets larger (per Steve McConnell: "Software Estimation: Demystifying the Black Art"). BTW the "Software Estimation" book is really awesome and in my opinion a must read for anyone in a tech company with a leadership role.
It's true smaller teams are more efficient. But I feel like it trivializes the complexity, comparison, especially when a lot of good detailed works on the subject already exist.
I would be inclined to agree with the premise of the article, but the evidence given is flawed at best.