3 ms·
I'm generally baffled when companies opt to hire a junior dev for ~$110k, when an additional 30% more income can get them someone 10x more productive.
by sebleon 8y ago
I'm generally baffled when companies opt to hire a junior dev for ~$110k, when an additional 30% more income can get them someone 10x more productive.
- koolba 8y agoOr they spend the +30% and get someone who’s just as productive or 10x less productive. It’s not a magic price performance formula.
- hinkley 8y agoHave you ever worked on a team with only senior people? Nobody wants to do any grunt work. So everything turns into an overly automated nightmare.
- kazinator 8y agoOr they can get two competent testers. :)
- analog31 8y agoI've told my boss: You can get two junior technicians for what you're paying me, if hours of "productivity" is what you're measuring.
- PhasmaFelis 8y agoSource?
- mianos 8y agoThis also happens in practice because the super experienced 10x guy has not balanced a RB tree or some similarly 100% solved std library algo in practice for 20 years and won't even get the job. The young 1X guy just got of uni and had to do it as an assignment just a year ago so they will employ him first, as they have no repeatable way to differentiate between a resume BS artist and the real McCoy. It costs everyone but that is automation practiced on a corporate scale.
- blablabla123 8y agoIt may surprise you, but the people I worked with the last few years strongly preferred very senior developers. So on the contrary one could argue that they are cheaper (yes ;)) but also can learn something new. Also I think that very junior people bring some kind of enthusiasm into teams. I guess the right mixture must be there.