> When you swap out somebody who does a decent job for another person who performs at about the same level it's not really that noticeable. >> Which interestin

> When you swap out somebody who does a decent job for another person who performs at about the same level it's not really that noticeable. >> Which interestingly is the same effect as swapping out somebody who does nothing for someone else who does nothing. I disagree. Swapping out a decent senior dev for a decent senior dev doesn't have a net negative effect like swapping out a senior dev who does nothing for another senior dev who does nothing. In scenario one, you have a senior dev who ramps up in a decent amount of time, does the work they're paid for, and isn't a waste of time and money like a bad hire. In the second scenario, you have a senior dev who's just as damaging as their predecessor, but you've lost the time and money you've invested in onboarding them while also paying the ongoing opportunity cost you could have avoided with a decent hire and any technical debt they accrue gets tossed on the pile with the rest of the debt their predecessor accrued. It would have been better to have just kept the first guy instead of wasting time, money, and morale on someone new.