4 ms·

I think people might finally be wising up to to the fact that outsourcing knowledge work to the cheapest foreign country doesn't often produce great results. C

by douche 10y ago

I think people might finally be wising up to to the fact that outsourcing knowledge work to the cheapest foreign country doesn't often produce great results. Communication overheard, time-shifting, mismatch of cultural expectations and norms, it introduces a lot of complexity. And sometimes, you just get what you pay for. I work with customers every day that decided to axe their internal IT staffs and outsource it to the big consulting and services firms. It may have made Bill Lumbergh's stock go up a quarter of a point in the short term, but the reduced efficiency, red tape and typically less-than-stellar competence drags on the whole organization.

Clubber 10y ago
You are absolutely right. The people who make those decisions aren't paid for quality, they are paid to cut costs. They will offshore their entire departments, get a huge bonus, then cut and run to do it to the next company before it all comes crashing down. There are success stories, but those success stories of H1B aren't the ones that pay bare minimum. Companies who pay top dollar for H1B get the great ones. The companies who pay bottom dollar get shut down in 5 years. You'd figure after 20+ years of this, executives would learn, but they don't care to. They are incentivized for precisely what they do.
- splintercell 10y ago
  > The people who make those decisions aren't paid for quality, they are paid to cut costs. This exists because not every product carries same gross profit margin. Apple launched iWatch, but it fails miserably, so Apple in an attempt to recuperate some costs, wants to produce the watch cheaply. Enter the people who can produce it cheaply. Of course the quality won't be the same, but apparently there isn't a market for high quality steel smart watches, but for lower quality plasticky smart watches.
  - Clubber 10y ago
    We're talking about labor, specifically programming, not cost of materials.
    - splintercell 10y ago
      And labor is a cost to produce something. When Blue Apron built their product, they had to spend on the development time for it. If people are willing to subscribe to Blue Apron for $175 per week, then Blue Apron can build the product by hiring the best individuals, in the shortest amount of time. But if Blue Apron's customers are only willing to use a service like that for $60 per month, then BA must hire and deliver accordingly.
      - Clubber 10y ago
        It doesn't really work that way. You can hire 1 top notch guy for $200K a year and produce a better product faster than 10 guys at $50,000 a year. You are assuming that developers are cogs. They are not assembly line workers, they are more like authors. Programming is a creative endeavor. The issue is really two fold: 1. Execs think that programmers are cogs and one is just as good as the other. 2. Many companies can't keep good developers because they are hell holes and the culture doesn't even know how to promote creativity.

by douche 10y ago

Clubber 10y ago

You are absolutely right. The people who make those decisions aren't paid for quality, they are paid to cut costs. They will offshore their entire departments, get a huge bonus, then cut and run to do it to the next company before it all comes crashing down. There are success stories, but those success stories of H1B aren't the ones that pay bare minimum. Companies who pay top dollar for H1B get the great ones. The companies who pay bottom dollar get shut down in 5 years. You'd figure after 20+ years of this, executives would learn, but they don't care to. They are incentivized for precisely what they do.

splintercell 10y ago
> The people who make those decisions aren't paid for quality, they are paid to cut costs. This exists because not every product carries same gross profit margin. Apple launched iWatch, but it fails miserably, so Apple in an attempt to recuperate some costs, wants to produce the watch cheaply. Enter the people who can produce it cheaply. Of course the quality won't be the same, but apparently there isn't a market for high quality steel smart watches, but for lower quality plasticky smart watches.
- Clubber 10y ago
  We're talking about labor, specifically programming, not cost of materials.
  - splintercell 10y ago
    And labor is a cost to produce something. When Blue Apron built their product, they had to spend on the development time for it. If people are willing to subscribe to Blue Apron for $175 per week, then Blue Apron can build the product by hiring the best individuals, in the shortest amount of time. But if Blue Apron's customers are only willing to use a service like that for $60 per month, then BA must hire and deliver accordingly.
    - Clubber 10y ago
      It doesn't really work that way. You can hire 1 top notch guy for $200K a year and produce a better product faster than 10 guys at $50,000 a year. You are assuming that developers are cogs. They are not assembly line workers, they are more like authors. Programming is a creative endeavor. The issue is really two fold: 1. Execs think that programmers are cogs and one is just as good as the other. 2. Many companies can't keep good developers because they are hell holes and the culture doesn't even know how to promote creativity.