5 ms·

Nobody wants 10x developers these days. All companies are looking for 1/x developers because then they can brag about their head count to get acquired or to rai

Nobody wants 10x developers these days. All companies are looking for 1/x developers because then they can brag about their head count to get acquired or to raise more money from investors or banks.

oferka 6y ago
Not sure about the entire industry, but at least for the companies I worked in/with during the last few years, it's the opposite. In most investment rounds/IPO/acquisition scenarios, high HC is a disadvantage. I have seen investors that are actually treating the revenue per HC number as a performance indicator.
- gt565k 6y ago
  Exactly! The idea that having more employees is better is complete BS. We all know that start-ups work because they are small and focus on problem solving, not dealing with bureaucracy and administrative inefficiencies. Look at the whatsapp acquisition. It was touted so much because the company had only 50 engineers. High revenue per headcount is a good indicator of successful execution, good hiring practices and organizational structure, and a solid culture. If you can achieve the same results with 5 people that a company needs 20 people for, you'll obviously be the more profitable and desirable company for a VC to invest in.
- qznc 6y ago
  You have to distinguish between the incentives for the company and individuals. For example, it makes little sense for a company to use a different web framework every year. It makes sense for individual developers to accumulate a large list for their resume. Likewise, it makes not sense for a company to optimize for a large headcount. It does make sense for an individual manager because leading 100 people looks better than 20 on his resume.
- jokethrowaway 6y ago
  Bad for the company, good for middle managers that can brag about managing 50 eng at their next gig
phendrenad2 6y ago
This definitely happens. It's a legitimate strategy. When the customers come tour your company offices, do you want it to be a tiny little 5-man hole in the wall above a coffee shop in SF? Or do you want an entire floor of a building, with dozens of people drawing things on whiteboards? If the excess headcount will get you the customer, and the contract is worth more than those developers make in a year, then the choice is obvious.
- phendrenad2 6y ago
  Of course, you have to actually use all of those people, otherwise it's dishonest. And customers aren't wrong is not wanting to work with smaller suppliers. Headcount can be evidence of ability to deliver.

Nobody wants 10x developers these days. All companies are looking for 1/x developers because then they can brag about their head count to get acquired or to raise more money from investors or banks.

oferka 6y ago

Not sure about the entire industry, but at least for the companies I worked in/with during the last few years, it's the opposite. In most investment rounds/IPO/acquisition scenarios, high HC is a disadvantage. I have seen investors that are actually treating the revenue per HC number as a performance indicator.

gt565k 6y ago
Exactly! The idea that having more employees is better is complete BS. We all know that start-ups work because they are small and focus on problem solving, not dealing with bureaucracy and administrative inefficiencies. Look at the whatsapp acquisition. It was touted so much because the company had only 50 engineers. High revenue per headcount is a good indicator of successful execution, good hiring practices and organizational structure, and a solid culture. If you can achieve the same results with 5 people that a company needs 20 people for, you'll obviously be the more profitable and desirable company for a VC to invest in.
qznc 6y ago
You have to distinguish between the incentives for the company and individuals. For example, it makes little sense for a company to use a different web framework every year. It makes sense for individual developers to accumulate a large list for their resume. Likewise, it makes not sense for a company to optimize for a large headcount. It does make sense for an individual manager because leading 100 people looks better than 20 on his resume.
jokethrowaway 6y ago
Bad for the company, good for middle managers that can brag about managing 50 eng at their next gig

phendrenad2 6y ago

This definitely happens. It's a legitimate strategy. When the customers come tour your company offices, do you want it to be a tiny little 5-man hole in the wall above a coffee shop in SF? Or do you want an entire floor of a building, with dozens of people drawing things on whiteboards? If the excess headcount will get you the customer, and the contract is worth more than those developers make in a year, then the choice is obvious.

phendrenad2 6y ago
Of course, you have to actually use all of those people, otherwise it's dishonest. And customers aren't wrong is not wanting to work with smaller suppliers. Headcount can be evidence of ability to deliver.