4 ms·

I worked at one of Deloitte's sister companies (another one of the Big 4). I used to think the same way you did, until I later had experience working with other

I worked at one of Deloitte's sister companies (another one of the Big 4). I used to think the same way you did, until I later had experience working with other software consulting companies. As bad as Deloitte et al are (and holy shit are they bad, especially at producing software), they are sadly still much better than most of the other clown shops out there.

paxys 6y ago
I have worked with some amazing consulting firms, but those came with a $250/hr per developer price tag at the cheap end. It says something though that large companies wouldn't blink at paying that much for a lawyer or skilled mechanic, but when it comes to software they'll go for the cheap option and then complain about bugs.
- jariel 6y ago
  I'm going to be that salary is not hugely correlated with skill, but more or less skill in marketing. It takes talent to recognize talent so I think most of software is mispriced.
- qwepeyote 6y ago
  Name some. mailto:decode(“7872746f7370776f3131377a40636f636b2e6c69“)
stepstop 6y ago
> most of the other clown shops out there Who, in your experience? Because the smaller shops tend to have brighter people, often with the founder involved (or one-step removed), in my experience
- txcwpalpha 6y ago
  Smaller shops are a huge hit-or-miss minefield in my experience. Some of them can be rockstars, but those rockstars are typically already 100% engaged with a long-term client or are on the road to be acquired by Deloitte et al. On the other hand, most of the non-rockstars might as well just be staffing agencies that aren't any better than hiring a random part time dev from craiglist. The sweet spot in my experience is the mid-size consulting companies, like around ~500 employees or so, because you know that they are at least good enough to stay in business long enough to grow, but they also aren't yet big enough to be bureacratic, incentive-warped, soul-sucking machines like Deloitte/Accenture.
CyberDildonics 6y ago
The question I have is if there is even a market for people people to build good software. It doesn't even seem like a money issue when I hear about tens of millions of dollars being sunk into projects that go nowhere.
- txcwpalpha 6y ago
  My genuine experience is that when you are building something as large and high-profile as a large state's unemployment system, there is absolutely no possibility for the resulting software to be "good" anyway. This is especially true for government clients. And the reason that IBM/Deloitte/etc are always the names getting trashed for these is because those are literally the only companies big enough to take on such a project in the first place. All of the smaller projects I took part in had much better results, but you're much less likely to hear about some random mid-size company's app that is working just fine on the front page of HN (and of course, those smaller projects happen less often anyway since Deloitte really focuses more on getting those giant projects).
  - moron4hire 6y ago
    It's a culture problem. There is a belief that the size and complexity of the project must match the size and complexity of the client. So small, nimble companies don't even get considered. The budget gets set before any evaluation of the problem is done. You could give that $10mil to a 250 person consulting company and they'll make it happen. But that will never happen. Hell, the SOW was probably written by some at Deloitte, stuffed with whatever cross section of requirements are unique enough to make them the only vendor available that matches it. Then they will bleed the contract by putting expensive partners on it who literally do nothing but suck oxygen out of the room. That's how they get around maximum multiplier of salary regulations on government contracts.
    - txcwpalpha 6y ago
      >There is a belief that the size and complexity of the others must match the size and complexity of the client. So small, nimble companies don't even get considered. The budget gets set before any evaluation of the problem is done. My experience is that it's more about consistency and "knowing what you're going to get". When you hire Deloitte, you know they've done this exact same type of project 100 times before, and each time it turned out terrible-but-acceptable. You're 90% sure that it isn't going to result in an amazing product, but you're also 90% sure that you'll at least get something somewhat usable for your money (and if you don't, you know that Deloitte is going to be around long enough to sue them). With a random 250 person consulting company, you have no idea what you're going to get and much less confidence that you'll end up with anything usable at all. Hell, you don't even know if they're going to still be in business a couple years from now. And with that much money at stake, that's a risk nobody wants to take.
TrackerFF 6y ago
Tbh, software consulting towards gov. entities is a almost guaranteed shitshow, from all perspectives. It's just a recipe for disaster, unless handled very carefully. On one side, you have consulting companies that want to maximize their billing - no mater what. On the other side, you have tons of red tape to navigate through, clients that may not know what they want, or just incompetent people in charge of writing the spec. And with huge expectations, at that.

paxys 6y ago

I have worked with some amazing consulting firms, but those came with a $250/hr per developer price tag at the cheap end. It says something though that large companies wouldn't blink at paying that much for a lawyer or skilled mechanic, but when it comes to software they'll go for the cheap option and then complain about bugs.

jariel 6y ago
I'm going to be that salary is not hugely correlated with skill, but more or less skill in marketing. It takes talent to recognize talent so I think most of software is mispriced.
qwepeyote 6y ago
Name some. mailto:decode(“7872746f7370776f3131377a40636f636b2e6c69“)

stepstop 6y ago

> most of the other clown shops out there Who, in your experience? Because the smaller shops tend to have brighter people, often with the founder involved (or one-step removed), in my experience

txcwpalpha 6y ago
Smaller shops are a huge hit-or-miss minefield in my experience. Some of them can be rockstars, but those rockstars are typically already 100% engaged with a long-term client or are on the road to be acquired by Deloitte et al. On the other hand, most of the non-rockstars might as well just be staffing agencies that aren't any better than hiring a random part time dev from craiglist. The sweet spot in my experience is the mid-size consulting companies, like around ~500 employees or so, because you know that they are at least good enough to stay in business long enough to grow, but they also aren't yet big enough to be bureacratic, incentive-warped, soul-sucking machines like Deloitte/Accenture.

CyberDildonics 6y ago

The question I have is if there is even a market for people people to build good software. It doesn't even seem like a money issue when I hear about tens of millions of dollars being sunk into projects that go nowhere.

txcwpalpha 6y ago
My genuine experience is that when you are building something as large and high-profile as a large state's unemployment system, there is absolutely no possibility for the resulting software to be "good" anyway. This is especially true for government clients. And the reason that IBM/Deloitte/etc are always the names getting trashed for these is because those are literally the only companies big enough to take on such a project in the first place. All of the smaller projects I took part in had much better results, but you're much less likely to hear about some random mid-size company's app that is working just fine on the front page of HN (and of course, those smaller projects happen less often anyway since Deloitte really focuses more on getting those giant projects).
- moron4hire 6y ago
  It's a culture problem. There is a belief that the size and complexity of the project must match the size and complexity of the client. So small, nimble companies don't even get considered. The budget gets set before any evaluation of the problem is done. You could give that $10mil to a 250 person consulting company and they'll make it happen. But that will never happen. Hell, the SOW was probably written by some at Deloitte, stuffed with whatever cross section of requirements are unique enough to make them the only vendor available that matches it. Then they will bleed the contract by putting expensive partners on it who literally do nothing but suck oxygen out of the room. That's how they get around maximum multiplier of salary regulations on government contracts.
  - txcwpalpha 6y ago
    >There is a belief that the size and complexity of the others must match the size and complexity of the client. So small, nimble companies don't even get considered. The budget gets set before any evaluation of the problem is done. My experience is that it's more about consistency and "knowing what you're going to get". When you hire Deloitte, you know they've done this exact same type of project 100 times before, and each time it turned out terrible-but-acceptable. You're 90% sure that it isn't going to result in an amazing product, but you're also 90% sure that you'll at least get something somewhat usable for your money (and if you don't, you know that Deloitte is going to be around long enough to sue them). With a random 250 person consulting company, you have no idea what you're going to get and much less confidence that you'll end up with anything usable at all. Hell, you don't even know if they're going to still be in business a couple years from now. And with that much money at stake, that's a risk nobody wants to take.

TrackerFF 6y ago

Tbh, software consulting towards gov. entities is a almost guaranteed shitshow, from all perspectives. It's just a recipe for disaster, unless handled very carefully. On one side, you have consulting companies that want to maximize their billing - no mater what. On the other side, you have tons of red tape to navigate through, clients that may not know what they want, or just incompetent people in charge of writing the spec. And with huge expectations, at that.