21 ms·

The Pop-Up Employer: Build a Team, Do the Job, Say Goodbye

206 points by dpflan 9y ago

mattnewton 9y ago
This reminds me of a certain cyberpunk staple where a team is assembled by an AI for a task(omitted to not spoil). I wonder if we'll get to the point where this team assembly is mostly automated or if there are things that it will remain cheaper/ more effective to keep humans making the hiring decisions? They say they are using AI, but it was unclear if they are using AI to train on human-picked teams now or if they already have a model that is working.
- exit 9y ago
  i feel like an ai capable of assembling a team of humans for tackling a task will have better things to do than assembling teams of humans for tackling tasks
  - justonepost 9y ago
    Not to spoil too much but the task was definitely a part of the reason why it didn't have better things to do. Neuromancer, by William Gibson definitely a classic
    - throwanem 9y ago
      "Not to spoil too much", you say - and proceed to identify the novel of which GP's comment spoils the entire plot. Granted, more than thirty years after publication I'm not sure spoilers are still worth worrying about. But, you know, internal consistency is a thing, too...
    - jcadam 9y ago
      Damnit, I'm actually reading that novel (for the first time) right now.
    - s73ver 9y ago
      SPOILER QUESTION So the thing mentioned above is not something you know from the get go?
      - Pulcinella 9y ago
        No but you find it maybe around halfway through the novel. It is definitely not like the main twist or anything.
  - Jtsummers 9y ago
    In the real-world, planning algorithms are AI so this isn't really so unreasonable. Supply the AI planner with a set of tasks (objectives) and let it plan out what needs to be done. Provide it with a set of actuators (this could be people, software, physical systems) which are capable of, given some input, accomplishing the tasks needed for the final objective(s). Give the same planner or a separate one the authority to act within various constraints (time objectives, financial and other resource constraints). EDIT: Honestly, I could see a lot of intermediary jobs being replaced or largely displaced by such a planner. As an example, the USAF has a role called "Item Manager". Their job is to track materiel (primarily) needed for various systems and customers, and make sure that they're available when they need to be, get serviced when they need to be, are replaced when they need to be. A (very abstract) example might be a particular ground vehicle, let's say trucks. They have maintenance schedules, they have spare parts that are needed, and replacements need to be available should one irreparably breakdown. So an IM may be responsible for every truck of that kind for 100 customers (various squadrons around the world) each with maybe 10-20 trucks on average. A lot of their work is already semi-automated, but with sufficient care the full scheduling of maintenance, receipt of damage reports, maintaining a supply of spare parts and trucks, can be fully automated. With a human perhaps only involved to assess the damage reports submitted from the field, and to periodically sanity check the numbers, and to actually authorize spending requests. The AI planner can be given all the information needed (including budget, shipping logistics, storage availability) to do a lot of the planning itself.
    - mattnewton 9y ago
      These types of "AI" would also benefit from some old fashioned rules-based systems too, so that they could be audited for legal compliance (for example, it is desirable that they provably do not discriminate against protected classes in the US)
  - throwanem 9y ago
    Really? Humans are unparalleled when it comes to doing things in the physical world. An AI interested in doing things in the physical world could do much worse than to assemble a team of humans and give them a reason to want to accomplish the things it wants done.
    - srtjstjsj 9y ago
      unparalleled? the vast majority of physical work is done by machines. humans are the gods in the gaps
      - throwanem 9y ago
        You're wrong about who does most of the work. But even if you weren't - who builds the machines?
        che_shirecat 9y ago
        other machines. much more efficiently too. programming those machines is gap work
- beisner 9y ago
  I've heard about some hedge fund trying to work on something along these lines. I don't know enough about the program to discuss its technical merit, but it's broad goal is to systematize management, and build really detailed profiles of employee strengths and weaknesses in all kinds of disciplines, specifically for the purpose of team formation and management.
  - davidlee1435 9y ago
    Bridgewater Associates[1]? From what I could gather, they have a very unique company culture to the point of being cultish. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-is-building-an-algorithmic-model-of-its-founders-brain-1482423694 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-i...
- s73ver 9y ago
  I could see AI selecting a set of candidates, but I don't think the people running the show would be willing to delegate the actual hiring of them to an AI.
  - mattnewton 9y ago
    Maybe with human review, but that's how you get the one-click team they talk about in the article to scale, no?
- smaps 9y ago
  That is one of my favorite books!
  - TranquilMarmot 9y ago
    I just finished the whole trilogy, really an amazing piece of work.
- bitL 9y ago
  AI capable of assembling a truly great team would be probably on a higher level than all the candidates it gets to evaluate ;-)
  - mattnewton 9y ago
    I don't think this follows at all, I think it could more easily be interpreted as a narrow AI problem than a general intelligence problem, where you respond to signals and hire/ fire much the same way high frequency trading works. Those bots make complex decisions based on all the signals they can pipe in, but no one thinks that they can build themselves robotic bodies to go out and develop houses for sale if they detect real estate is going to go up :)
zitterbewegung 9y ago
I have seen this with other types of organizations like when bands go on tour (such as Radiohead) they created an organization to manage their tour in addition to their album release. I have also seen this in Anime where a company is formed to produce anime. On the other hand a bunch of movies have production companies that are tied with the Director and that company is not transient.
awjr 9y ago
TBH this is pretty much how most freelance work is these days. However tying the end of a contract to the delivery deadline is usually hard to achieve. My last contract was an initial 2 months that eventually lasted 7 months but I agreed in the last month to leave the moment the work was complete. If it wasn't for the 18 UI improvements the product manager came up with in the last two weeks, I would have had a nice break between contracts. :/ What I have noticed that there seems to be a skeleton dev/architect skill set within these organisations with a focus on sales/marketing. In effect us freelancers facilitate fast delivery of a product, but do leave the resident dev to hold the fort while we head off onto pastures new.
- dsfyu404ed 9y ago
  This structure has existed forever in government contracts. Northrop Grumman owns a shipyard and wins a contract. They build most of the ship. Raytheon supplies a missile system or three. BAE does some systems integration. A laundry list of companies you've never heard of do everything in between. At scale it's more efficient to be over/under staffed at times rather than perpetually hiring. Within the larger contractors headcount is semi-constant and they shuffle bodies from project to project as appropriate. The smaller companies you've never heard of (e.g. a machine shop that NG subbed out the run of several thousand of a part to) will hire people or bring in temps for the contract .
- jmkni 9y ago
  > However tying the end of a contract to the delivery deadline is usually hard to achieve. That's by design. Why end a project when you can drag it out for another month and secure another month of those sweet day rates for your big team, skimming off the top?
  - crispyambulance 9y ago
    It really depends on how the contract is designed. Many government contracts have a "point of total assumption" wherein the contractor "eats" costs that go beyond some agreed threshold. In other words, if the project slips, they start losing money.
  - 9y ago
cowardlydragon 9y ago
aaa All hail the expansion of the servant proletariat here to serve my Ayn Randian self-actualization in silicon valley, which will soon have a hidden force field to hide it from the lazy government who just want to live off of our holy, valiant, idealistic capitalistic labors.
justonepost 9y ago
Yeah I've been thinking about this for a very long time. I think something like this would work really well with the lean start up type approach at least until you hit product market fit. Every good pitch should have an estimate for the cost of the flash corporation and the expected non vanity metrics they should achieve at the end of the initial phase.
projectramo 9y ago
Here is the issue: software is not a product, it is a service. It has to be modified, supported, updated, debugged, improved, and so on. I don't think a "flash" organization can produce a "serious" product. And by serious I don't mean one that is complicated or large -- it can do that -- by serious I mean one that is intended to be used for more than a few months.
- jstanley 9y ago
  But modification, support, debugging, improvements and so on take less than 1 full-time person.
  - projectramo 9y ago
    It depends on the product. I suppose we should now talk in ratios of FTE:PTE, and where we in the lifecycle and so on. Note that bringing in part-time help, contractors and consultants is not new. The article seems to be making a point about the degree to which it is used.
- criddell 9y ago
  I know companies in the video game space that do this. They either are hired to write something or produce something in house. They staff up, write the title, ship it, do one or two patches, then essentially disband the team while they look for the next project.
  - barrkel 9y ago
    Video games are show business, though, and follow the same gig-oriented pattern.
    - criddell 9y ago
      Sure, but it's still just software.
      - 9y ago
JeromeLon 9y ago
This is predicted by contract theory: in a perfect free market (we are still far, but we keep getting closer), and a perfect contract market (we are still very far, but we keep getting closer), there are no companies at all. Just ad hoc contracts.
- dsr_ 9y ago
  Firm theory says that all companies exist to reduce the friction of negotiating all these things over and over again.
  - 0xbear 9y ago
    With transparent, market driven pricing, you don't have to negotiate.
    - ebiester 9y ago
      Doesn't that assume that contracting resources are all the same?
      - 0xbear 9y ago
        Not necessarily. You just need a trustworthy reputation system to go with everything else. Some things will cost more, some less, more reputation costs more, too. Relevant, in demand experience costs more.
        ashark 9y ago
        What exactly do you think a market is?
        ebiester 9y ago
        Oh, goodie. I get to compete against people who are gaming the system to enhance their artificial reputation in the name of a market. Do I get to trade recommendations with 30 people on "Agile Methodologies?" We can turn LinkedIn into a MMORPG! Great!
ryanmarr 9y ago
This is how Film and Television has always worked. Often times with even more people and extremely complex relationships and functions.
- btilly 9y ago
  Nope. It has only worked that way since the breakdown of the studio system in the early 1950s. But the key to making it efficient is well-defined and well-understood roles.
- ci5er 9y ago
  Well, since the studio model broke down and gave way to the guild model, maybe ... but the studio model was solid until it wasn't. Baseball franchises (for example) own the players until they are allowed out of their contract to become free agents (like after Marilyn Monroe's contractual obligations to the studio back in the day).
lkrubner 9y ago
The best writing on the subject of temporary businesses is by Ted Goranson, especially his short monogram "Whale of a tale", now out of print (I've suggested to him that he simply upload it to Amazon and self publish it, but he has not yet done so). Of businesses that exist for a specific job he calls them Agile Virtual Enterprises. He traces the history of the AVEs to the whaling ships of the 1600s. He points out that the laws created then continue to shape modern AVEs, and countries that did not do whaling in the 1600s generally don't have AVEs now. He focuses on industries such as film to look at how AVEs evolved during the 20th century and how that culture helped influence modern startup life.
Animats 9y ago
The pop-up employer and the disposable employee. The future of work. What's wrong with this picture? Hollywood does it that way. They're heavily unionized, which gives the workers some bargaining power. Construction used to be heavily unionized, which made per-project employment not too oppressive. To see how unions can work in software areas, see The Animation Guild, IATSE Local 839, which represents most of the people who make animated and CGI content in Hollywood. They have a standard contract and minimum rates for different jobs.[1] Most projects pay more than the posted minimum; that's negotiable. The lowest rate for any job under the union contract is currently $31.50/hour, for an "inbetweener" in the first 6 months of work. There are also provisions which keep employees from being jerked around. A basic feature of Hollywood contracts is that there may be situations that require extra work, even extreme hours, and all that costs the employer. Time and a half after 40 hours or 5 days. Double time after 14 hours, including meal breaks. Any day where work is required must be paid for at least 4 hours. (This is why film scheduling and budgeting is a real discipline while software scheduling is a joke.) [1] https://animationguild.org/the-guild-contract-one-year-in/ https://animationguild.org/the-guild-contract-one-year-in/
- zrail 9y ago
  Another thing that makes the Hollywood model work is that people who work enough get benefits like health insurance directly from their union. That's significantly different than, say, the UAW where the employer typically pays for an insurance package that the union negotiates.
  - Animats 9y ago
    The Animation Guild makes the point that their pension plan has outlived all but two Hollywood animation studios.
- paulddraper 9y ago
  > What's wrong with this picture? Nothing, as long as you work on short-term projects. It might be boring working full-time on the same codebase for 5 years, but you get really good at it.
untog 9y ago
Stuff like this reminds me that politics is inescapable. Why? Because living in the US, my health care is tied to my employer, so no matter how desirable this kind of work might look to me, I'm not going to do it, because while I can tolerate instability in work (developers are lucky to be able to get a job very easily) I will not tolerate instability in my family's health coverage. For a few years there it really looked like the US was going to go in the right direction, but alas. And this ought to be a totally off-topic rant, but when you tie employment with other statuses like the US does, you can't ignore it.
- moron4hire 9y ago
  If the pay is lucrative enough, you could just buy your own health insurance. You probably already are notionally adding the cost of private health insurance into your understanding of your salary, just to have a more accurate representation of your benefits package.
  - untog 9y ago
    You can, but from my understanding the math is not equivalent - employer-subsidised healthcare is cheaper even when you factor everything in, because they benefit from group-buying discounts. So yes, if lucrative enough. But that's quite the qualifier, especially when you won't have a reliable income.
    - Apocryphon 9y ago
      Sounds like a case for unions or some other professional association where workers can band together into common insurance pools.
      - westbywest 9y ago
        The ability to negotiate healthcare benefits as a group is indeed a popular justification for unions in fields not historically associated with union labor. Freelancers Union is an example, in addition to others mentioned up-thread. https://www.freelancersunion.org/benefits/ https://www.freelancersunion.org/benefits/
crispyambulance 9y ago
This sounds similar to the "tour of duty" concept of employment that Reid Hoffman wrote about (https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-employee-compact https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-emplo...). It seems like a good idea and, if done right, could be a win-win for employers and employees. Unfortunately, very few companies can even make their annual performance evaluations work using baloney "SMART" goals, 360-reviews and whatever other bullshit HR dogma they're attempting. Pop-up teams (or tours of duty) require a really fine ability to measure the value of individuals and understand their strengths and weaknesses. I just don't see how that kind nuance is remotely possible in most workplaces. The chances are more than very high that pop-ups are just going to end up being heavily loaded with asshole-driven project managers and hapless line workers who get jerked around until they quit.
- s73ver 9y ago
  At the moment, however, that's less workable due to the way that benefits and health insurance are tied to employment.
songzme 9y ago
I would consider myself a pop-up employee. Looking back at my professional career, I've pretty much switched companies every year (4 companies in the past 5 years since graduation). This has been tremendous for my growth (financially, emotionally, and intellectually). The financial upside is obvious. In addition to stock options, RSU's, the sign-on bonus adds up nicely. The additional 20-50k to my (already pretty high) yearly salary helped me buy my first 2 homes faster than I had planned for. Giving myself a timeframe with a company helped me prioritize what is important. If I had a track record of not producing much during my time at a company, I would probably have a hard time finding a job again (and I don't want that). So I learned how to work with people collaboratively to get things done. For example, if I wanted to implement a new framework or system, I learned to work with my teammates to convince them to try it out with me. Then when I bring this up to my manager it is easy to switch because everybody is already doing it. (Sidenote: I learned to avoid taking the spotlight. I learned to encourage my teammate to bring up new solutions that we've been working on so they get the credit). By working with a few companies, I got to see (and compare) how different companies set up their technology stack. I thought about the stack I was accustomed to and tried to see why the company went with choices they went with. These different experiences helped me grow as an engineer. Also, I didn't have to put up with anyone's bullshit. I simply did what I believe was right (sometimes cautiously against what my managers say). My coworkers were my greatest ally (and litmus test). If I can't convince them to do whats right, then I was probably wrong. With a whole team convinced, it makes the manager's life easier. Now, 4 companies later, I live off my rental income, help my mom with gardening, and teach people how to code (and more importantly, how to think). Here are some concerns that you might have if you consider doing the same: 1. Do employers get worried that you switch jobs frequently? Depends. If you can show on your resume that you were able to produce great results, it won't matter. Here's a line I typically use: "I love my job, but I came across (your company) and I love the way you are (company's vision)." 2. Was it hard to quit a company? Yes. Having a goal to help my teammates get promoted and help them get visibility makes things easier. Friendship doesn't end with the job. You can still hangout with your manager and your coworkers! Tips: Don't apply for jobs, ask your friends to refer you. Don't have friends? Walk into a bar closest to your dream company and make one. This way, you can respond to "why do you want to leave your current job" with "I love my current job. But my friend told me that ... (insert great things about company) ..."
reggieband 9y ago
One of my fantasy ideas was a pop-up company that did destination projects. Like, have the project in Hawaii or Aspen or some other destination. Provide travel, accommodation, event planning, meals, etc. Imagine renting a huge mansion somewhere, or an entire compound of cabins by a lake. Go out on group activities, have "expert presentations". Put together like a "mission impossible" group of exceptional experts and build something. People commit for 1-3 months, all inclusive food, salary, etc.
- pm90 9y ago
  This would really only work for people without commitments i.e. mostly single and young. The idea sounds great though. Come to think of it, sounds like college ;).
  - reggieband 9y ago
    I agree there are drawbacks. I could imagine a certain allowance for spouses, children, etc. I got the idea from couchsurfing.com development. I heard anecdotes that they were trading couch time at their offices for dev time. I thought you can do much better than that. It also fit into an article I read on millenials being more motivated by "experiences" than salary. If you want to attract the best talent you should promise them some incredible experience - and destination employment seems to me to beat the Google campus type experience. To be honest, given my current circumstances I would jump at the opportunity for the right experience. I mostly choose where to work/live based on experience.
  - gorkonsine 9y ago
    >This would really only work for people without commitments i.e. mostly single and young. Or older and divorced with no kids (or no custody). That situation isn't too unusual these days. >The idea sounds great though. Yeah, sounds great to me. When you're newly divorced, something like this to give you a complete change of scenery would be very welcome.
- matthewleehess 9y ago
  In the oilfield, workers generally have rotational schedules. Something like 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off. The 2 weeks on is intense. 84+ hour work weeks, and still hitting the bar and partying every night. When you're on site, all laundry/meals/etc. are taken care of for you. Toolpushers (project managers) have budgets to cover booze (off-site), entertainment, and so on. The 2 weeks off is to go back home, spend time with family, go fishing, and whatever else you to have to do to relax and be refreshed for your next 2 weeks on. The workers usually get double occupancy rooms. One person works the day shift, the other works the night shift, both working on the same thing. During transition periods, they update each other with statuses of what's going on. As far as I can tell, this is the most ideal way of pushing limits on how to maximize output without burning everyone out completely. If someone had that kind of business model setup, I'd sign on in a heartbeat.
girvo 9y ago
This is how I ran my web agency back in 2007, to some decent success. "Hollywood" model, of a small network of trusted contractors, we'd find a client and come together to work on the project. Hardest part was ensuring the contracts in place were fair and strong, but once that was done it was mostly smooth sailing.

206 points by dpflan 9y ago

This reminds me of a certain cyberpunk staple where a team is assembled by an AI for a task(omitted to not spoil). I wonder if we'll get to the point where this team assembly is mostly automated or if there are things that it will remain cheaper/ more effective to keep humans making the hiring decisions? They say they are using AI, but it was unclear if they are using AI to train on human-picked teams now or if they already have a model that is working.

exit 9y ago
i feel like an ai capable of assembling a team of humans for tackling a task will have better things to do than assembling teams of humans for tackling tasks
- justonepost 9y ago
  Not to spoil too much but the task was definitely a part of the reason why it didn't have better things to do. Neuromancer, by William Gibson definitely a classic
  - throwanem 9y ago
    "Not to spoil too much", you say - and proceed to identify the novel of which GP's comment spoils the entire plot. Granted, more than thirty years after publication I'm not sure spoilers are still worth worrying about. But, you know, internal consistency is a thing, too...
  - jcadam 9y ago
    Damnit, I'm actually reading that novel (for the first time) right now.
  - s73ver 9y ago
    SPOILER QUESTION So the thing mentioned above is not something you know from the get go?
    - Pulcinella 9y ago
      No but you find it maybe around halfway through the novel. It is definitely not like the main twist or anything.
- Jtsummers 9y ago
  In the real-world, planning algorithms are AI so this isn't really so unreasonable. Supply the AI planner with a set of tasks (objectives) and let it plan out what needs to be done. Provide it with a set of actuators (this could be people, software, physical systems) which are capable of, given some input, accomplishing the tasks needed for the final objective(s). Give the same planner or a separate one the authority to act within various constraints (time objectives, financial and other resource constraints). EDIT: Honestly, I could see a lot of intermediary jobs being replaced or largely displaced by such a planner. As an example, the USAF has a role called "Item Manager". Their job is to track materiel (primarily) needed for various systems and customers, and make sure that they're available when they need to be, get serviced when they need to be, are replaced when they need to be. A (very abstract) example might be a particular ground vehicle, let's say trucks. They have maintenance schedules, they have spare parts that are needed, and replacements need to be available should one irreparably breakdown. So an IM may be responsible for every truck of that kind for 100 customers (various squadrons around the world) each with maybe 10-20 trucks on average. A lot of their work is already semi-automated, but with sufficient care the full scheduling of maintenance, receipt of damage reports, maintaining a supply of spare parts and trucks, can be fully automated. With a human perhaps only involved to assess the damage reports submitted from the field, and to periodically sanity check the numbers, and to actually authorize spending requests. The AI planner can be given all the information needed (including budget, shipping logistics, storage availability) to do a lot of the planning itself.
  - mattnewton 9y ago
    These types of "AI" would also benefit from some old fashioned rules-based systems too, so that they could be audited for legal compliance (for example, it is desirable that they provably do not discriminate against protected classes in the US)
- throwanem 9y ago
  Really? Humans are unparalleled when it comes to doing things in the physical world. An AI interested in doing things in the physical world could do much worse than to assemble a team of humans and give them a reason to want to accomplish the things it wants done.
  - srtjstjsj 9y ago
    unparalleled? the vast majority of physical work is done by machines. humans are the gods in the gaps
    - throwanem 9y ago
      You're wrong about who does most of the work. But even if you weren't - who builds the machines?
      - che_shirecat 9y ago
        other machines. much more efficiently too. programming those machines is gap work
beisner 9y ago
I've heard about some hedge fund trying to work on something along these lines. I don't know enough about the program to discuss its technical merit, but it's broad goal is to systematize management, and build really detailed profiles of employee strengths and weaknesses in all kinds of disciplines, specifically for the purpose of team formation and management.
- davidlee1435 9y ago
  Bridgewater Associates[1]? From what I could gather, they have a very unique company culture to the point of being cultish. [1] https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-is-building-an-algorithmic-model-of-its-founders-brain-1482423694 https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-worlds-largest-hedge-fund-i...
s73ver 9y ago
I could see AI selecting a set of candidates, but I don't think the people running the show would be willing to delegate the actual hiring of them to an AI.
- mattnewton 9y ago
  Maybe with human review, but that's how you get the one-click team they talk about in the article to scale, no?
smaps 9y ago
That is one of my favorite books!
- TranquilMarmot 9y ago
  I just finished the whole trilogy, really an amazing piece of work.
bitL 9y ago
AI capable of assembling a truly great team would be probably on a higher level than all the candidates it gets to evaluate ;-)
- mattnewton 9y ago
  I don't think this follows at all, I think it could more easily be interpreted as a narrow AI problem than a general intelligence problem, where you respond to signals and hire/ fire much the same way high frequency trading works. Those bots make complex decisions based on all the signals they can pipe in, but no one thinks that they can build themselves robotic bodies to go out and develop houses for sale if they detect real estate is going to go up :)

zitterbewegung 9y ago

I have seen this with other types of organizations like when bands go on tour (such as Radiohead) they created an organization to manage their tour in addition to their album release. I have also seen this in Anime where a company is formed to produce anime. On the other hand a bunch of movies have production companies that are tied with the Director and that company is not transient.

awjr 9y ago

TBH this is pretty much how most freelance work is these days. However tying the end of a contract to the delivery deadline is usually hard to achieve. My last contract was an initial 2 months that eventually lasted 7 months but I agreed in the last month to leave the moment the work was complete. If it wasn't for the 18 UI improvements the product manager came up with in the last two weeks, I would have had a nice break between contracts. :/ What I have noticed that there seems to be a skeleton dev/architect skill set within these organisations with a focus on sales/marketing. In effect us freelancers facilitate fast delivery of a product, but do leave the resident dev to hold the fort while we head off onto pastures new.

dsfyu404ed 9y ago
This structure has existed forever in government contracts. Northrop Grumman owns a shipyard and wins a contract. They build most of the ship. Raytheon supplies a missile system or three. BAE does some systems integration. A laundry list of companies you've never heard of do everything in between. At scale it's more efficient to be over/under staffed at times rather than perpetually hiring. Within the larger contractors headcount is semi-constant and they shuffle bodies from project to project as appropriate. The smaller companies you've never heard of (e.g. a machine shop that NG subbed out the run of several thousand of a part to) will hire people or bring in temps for the contract .
jmkni 9y ago
> However tying the end of a contract to the delivery deadline is usually hard to achieve. That's by design. Why end a project when you can drag it out for another month and secure another month of those sweet day rates for your big team, skimming off the top?
- crispyambulance 9y ago
  It really depends on how the contract is designed. Many government contracts have a "point of total assumption" wherein the contractor "eats" costs that go beyond some agreed threshold. In other words, if the project slips, they start losing money.
- 9y ago

cowardlydragon 9y ago

aaa All hail the expansion of the servant proletariat here to serve my Ayn Randian self-actualization in silicon valley, which will soon have a hidden force field to hide it from the lazy government who just want to live off of our holy, valiant, idealistic capitalistic labors.

justonepost 9y ago

Yeah I've been thinking about this for a very long time. I think something like this would work really well with the lean start up type approach at least until you hit product market fit. Every good pitch should have an estimate for the cost of the flash corporation and the expected non vanity metrics they should achieve at the end of the initial phase.

projectramo 9y ago

Here is the issue: software is not a product, it is a service. It has to be modified, supported, updated, debugged, improved, and so on. I don't think a "flash" organization can produce a "serious" product. And by serious I don't mean one that is complicated or large -- it can do that -- by serious I mean one that is intended to be used for more than a few months.

jstanley 9y ago
But modification, support, debugging, improvements and so on take less than 1 full-time person.
- projectramo 9y ago
  It depends on the product. I suppose we should now talk in ratios of FTE:PTE, and where we in the lifecycle and so on. Note that bringing in part-time help, contractors and consultants is not new. The article seems to be making a point about the degree to which it is used.
criddell 9y ago
I know companies in the video game space that do this. They either are hired to write something or produce something in house. They staff up, write the title, ship it, do one or two patches, then essentially disband the team while they look for the next project.
- barrkel 9y ago
  Video games are show business, though, and follow the same gig-oriented pattern.
  - criddell 9y ago
    Sure, but it's still just software.
    - 9y ago

JeromeLon 9y ago

This is predicted by contract theory: in a perfect free market (we are still far, but we keep getting closer), and a perfect contract market (we are still very far, but we keep getting closer), there are no companies at all. Just ad hoc contracts.

dsr_ 9y ago
Firm theory says that all companies exist to reduce the friction of negotiating all these things over and over again.
- 0xbear 9y ago
  With transparent, market driven pricing, you don't have to negotiate.
  - ebiester 9y ago
    Doesn't that assume that contracting resources are all the same?
    - 0xbear 9y ago
      Not necessarily. You just need a trustworthy reputation system to go with everything else. Some things will cost more, some less, more reputation costs more, too. Relevant, in demand experience costs more.
      - ashark 9y ago
        What exactly do you think a market is?
      - ebiester 9y ago
        Oh, goodie. I get to compete against people who are gaming the system to enhance their artificial reputation in the name of a market. Do I get to trade recommendations with 30 people on "Agile Methodologies?" We can turn LinkedIn into a MMORPG! Great!

ryanmarr 9y ago

This is how Film and Television has always worked. Often times with even more people and extremely complex relationships and functions.

btilly 9y ago
Nope. It has only worked that way since the breakdown of the studio system in the early 1950s. But the key to making it efficient is well-defined and well-understood roles.
ci5er 9y ago
Well, since the studio model broke down and gave way to the guild model, maybe ... but the studio model was solid until it wasn't. Baseball franchises (for example) own the players until they are allowed out of their contract to become free agents (like after Marilyn Monroe's contractual obligations to the studio back in the day).

lkrubner 9y ago

The best writing on the subject of temporary businesses is by Ted Goranson, especially his short monogram "Whale of a tale", now out of print (I've suggested to him that he simply upload it to Amazon and self publish it, but he has not yet done so). Of businesses that exist for a specific job he calls them Agile Virtual Enterprises. He traces the history of the AVEs to the whaling ships of the 1600s. He points out that the laws created then continue to shape modern AVEs, and countries that did not do whaling in the 1600s generally don't have AVEs now. He focuses on industries such as film to look at how AVEs evolved during the 20th century and how that culture helped influence modern startup life.

Animats 9y ago

The pop-up employer and the disposable employee. The future of work. What's wrong with this picture? Hollywood does it that way. They're heavily unionized, which gives the workers some bargaining power. Construction used to be heavily unionized, which made per-project employment not too oppressive. To see how unions can work in software areas, see The Animation Guild, IATSE Local 839, which represents most of the people who make animated and CGI content in Hollywood. They have a standard contract and minimum rates for different jobs.[1] Most projects pay more than the posted minimum; that's negotiable. The lowest rate for any job under the union contract is currently $31.50/hour, for an "inbetweener" in the first 6 months of work. There are also provisions which keep employees from being jerked around. A basic feature of Hollywood contracts is that there may be situations that require extra work, even extreme hours, and all that costs the employer. Time and a half after 40 hours or 5 days. Double time after 14 hours, including meal breaks. Any day where work is required must be paid for at least 4 hours. (This is why film scheduling and budgeting is a real discipline while software scheduling is a joke.) [1] https://animationguild.org/the-guild-contract-one-year-in/ https://animationguild.org/the-guild-contract-one-year-in/

zrail 9y ago
Another thing that makes the Hollywood model work is that people who work enough get benefits like health insurance directly from their union. That's significantly different than, say, the UAW where the employer typically pays for an insurance package that the union negotiates.
- Animats 9y ago
  The Animation Guild makes the point that their pension plan has outlived all but two Hollywood animation studios.
paulddraper 9y ago
> What's wrong with this picture? Nothing, as long as you work on short-term projects. It might be boring working full-time on the same codebase for 5 years, but you get really good at it.

untog 9y ago

Stuff like this reminds me that politics is inescapable. Why? Because living in the US, my health care is tied to my employer, so no matter how desirable this kind of work might look to me, I'm not going to do it, because while I can tolerate instability in work (developers are lucky to be able to get a job very easily) I will not tolerate instability in my family's health coverage. For a few years there it really looked like the US was going to go in the right direction, but alas. And this ought to be a totally off-topic rant, but when you tie employment with other statuses like the US does, you can't ignore it.

moron4hire 9y ago
If the pay is lucrative enough, you could just buy your own health insurance. You probably already are notionally adding the cost of private health insurance into your understanding of your salary, just to have a more accurate representation of your benefits package.
- untog 9y ago
  You can, but from my understanding the math is not equivalent - employer-subsidised healthcare is cheaper even when you factor everything in, because they benefit from group-buying discounts. So yes, if lucrative enough. But that's quite the qualifier, especially when you won't have a reliable income.
  - Apocryphon 9y ago
    Sounds like a case for unions or some other professional association where workers can band together into common insurance pools.
    - westbywest 9y ago
      The ability to negotiate healthcare benefits as a group is indeed a popular justification for unions in fields not historically associated with union labor. Freelancers Union is an example, in addition to others mentioned up-thread. https://www.freelancersunion.org/benefits/ https://www.freelancersunion.org/benefits/

crispyambulance 9y ago

This sounds similar to the "tour of duty" concept of employment that Reid Hoffman wrote about (https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-employee-compact https://hbr.org/2013/06/tours-of-duty-the-new-employer-emplo...). It seems like a good idea and, if done right, could be a win-win for employers and employees. Unfortunately, very few companies can even make their annual performance evaluations work using baloney "SMART" goals, 360-reviews and whatever other bullshit HR dogma they're attempting. Pop-up teams (or tours of duty) require a really fine ability to measure the value of individuals and understand their strengths and weaknesses. I just don't see how that kind nuance is remotely possible in most workplaces. The chances are more than very high that pop-ups are just going to end up being heavily loaded with asshole-driven project managers and hapless line workers who get jerked around until they quit.

s73ver 9y ago
At the moment, however, that's less workable due to the way that benefits and health insurance are tied to employment.

songzme 9y ago

I would consider myself a pop-up employee. Looking back at my professional career, I've pretty much switched companies every year (4 companies in the past 5 years since graduation). This has been tremendous for my growth (financially, emotionally, and intellectually). The financial upside is obvious. In addition to stock options, RSU's, the sign-on bonus adds up nicely. The additional 20-50k to my (already pretty high) yearly salary helped me buy my first 2 homes faster than I had planned for. Giving myself a timeframe with a company helped me prioritize what is important. If I had a track record of not producing much during my time at a company, I would probably have a hard time finding a job again (and I don't want that). So I learned how to work with people collaboratively to get things done. For example, if I wanted to implement a new framework or system, I learned to work with my teammates to convince them to try it out with me. Then when I bring this up to my manager it is easy to switch because everybody is already doing it. (Sidenote: I learned to avoid taking the spotlight. I learned to encourage my teammate to bring up new solutions that we've been working on so they get the credit). By working with a few companies, I got to see (and compare) how different companies set up their technology stack. I thought about the stack I was accustomed to and tried to see why the company went with choices they went with. These different experiences helped me grow as an engineer. Also, I didn't have to put up with anyone's bullshit. I simply did what I believe was right (sometimes cautiously against what my managers say). My coworkers were my greatest ally (and litmus test). If I can't convince them to do whats right, then I was probably wrong. With a whole team convinced, it makes the manager's life easier. Now, 4 companies later, I live off my rental income, help my mom with gardening, and teach people how to code (and more importantly, how to think). Here are some concerns that you might have if you consider doing the same: 1. Do employers get worried that you switch jobs frequently? Depends. If you can show on your resume that you were able to produce great results, it won't matter. Here's a line I typically use: "I love my job, but I came across (your company) and I love the way you are (company's vision)." 2. Was it hard to quit a company? Yes. Having a goal to help my teammates get promoted and help them get visibility makes things easier. Friendship doesn't end with the job. You can still hangout with your manager and your coworkers! Tips: Don't apply for jobs, ask your friends to refer you. Don't have friends? Walk into a bar closest to your dream company and make one. This way, you can respond to "why do you want to leave your current job" with "I love my current job. But my friend told me that ... (insert great things about company) ..."

reggieband 9y ago

One of my fantasy ideas was a pop-up company that did destination projects. Like, have the project in Hawaii or Aspen or some other destination. Provide travel, accommodation, event planning, meals, etc. Imagine renting a huge mansion somewhere, or an entire compound of cabins by a lake. Go out on group activities, have "expert presentations". Put together like a "mission impossible" group of exceptional experts and build something. People commit for 1-3 months, all inclusive food, salary, etc.

pm90 9y ago
This would really only work for people without commitments i.e. mostly single and young. The idea sounds great though. Come to think of it, sounds like college ;).
- reggieband 9y ago
  I agree there are drawbacks. I could imagine a certain allowance for spouses, children, etc. I got the idea from couchsurfing.com development. I heard anecdotes that they were trading couch time at their offices for dev time. I thought you can do much better than that. It also fit into an article I read on millenials being more motivated by "experiences" than salary. If you want to attract the best talent you should promise them some incredible experience - and destination employment seems to me to beat the Google campus type experience. To be honest, given my current circumstances I would jump at the opportunity for the right experience. I mostly choose where to work/live based on experience.
- gorkonsine 9y ago
  >This would really only work for people without commitments i.e. mostly single and young. Or older and divorced with no kids (or no custody). That situation isn't too unusual these days. >The idea sounds great though. Yeah, sounds great to me. When you're newly divorced, something like this to give you a complete change of scenery would be very welcome.
matthewleehess 9y ago
In the oilfield, workers generally have rotational schedules. Something like 2 weeks on, 2 weeks off. The 2 weeks on is intense. 84+ hour work weeks, and still hitting the bar and partying every night. When you're on site, all laundry/meals/etc. are taken care of for you. Toolpushers (project managers) have budgets to cover booze (off-site), entertainment, and so on. The 2 weeks off is to go back home, spend time with family, go fishing, and whatever else you to have to do to relax and be refreshed for your next 2 weeks on. The workers usually get double occupancy rooms. One person works the day shift, the other works the night shift, both working on the same thing. During transition periods, they update each other with statuses of what's going on. As far as I can tell, this is the most ideal way of pushing limits on how to maximize output without burning everyone out completely. If someone had that kind of business model setup, I'd sign on in a heartbeat.

girvo 9y ago

This is how I ran my web agency back in 2007, to some decent success. "Hollywood" model, of a small network of trusted contractors, we'd find a client and come together to work on the project. Hardest part was ensuring the contracts in place were fair and strong, but once that was done it was mostly smooth sailing.