3 ms·

An interesting corollary is that certain types of business are no longer economically viable. If I have a business that competes with advertising companies for

An interesting corollary is that certain types of business are no longer economically viable. If I have a business that competes with advertising companies for niche talent, my business model has to be able to generate the same outsized returns on that talent if I want to be able to afford them, so this limits the work I can do. I don't think people should work for below market wages, only observing how it can change what kinds of products and services are available. And in the case of tech talent, salaries are being driven up by a few key industries that arguably are not where society would like to see tech product and r&d investment concentrated.

walshemj 5y ago
Old school "media" agencies (all the big names) just don't get this this isnt the "mad men" days of the 1960's
lima 5y ago
Many people are indeed willing to work below market wages in exchange for working on something meaningful to them.
- echelon 5y ago
  Game developers are a classic example. They're paid trash salaries and treated like vermin.
benhurmarcel 5y ago
Those would be viable if done by an organization outside the US. Comp is still quite low in many countries, including in the "first" world (like western Europe).
tikhonj 5y ago
There are a lot of ways to compete besides salary, but my experience is that companies paying below-market-rate salaries tend to be less competitive on other axes too—with the exception of fields like research that have no trouble attracting far more superb candidates than the field can take. In my experience, autonomy, impact, psychological safety, remote work and flexible hours can all make up for substantial differences in pay, and would make the team more productive to boot. These are all aspects of the job a company can directly control; I'm not even talking about things like prestige, "mission" or super-deep technical problems. And yet, it seems like these aspects are all positively correlated with pay: higher-paid positions also come with more respect and a better work experience. What's keeping companies from changing this? Trust and respect go a long way. Of course, everyone and their dog claims they have a great culture, so a team would need a way to show rather than tell, but that's an eminently solvable problem. I've seen this work first-hand. For the same level of pay, hiring people on a Haskell project was markedly easier than other projects at the same company: people actively want to use Haskell and it also acts as a real signal that the team is willing to do things differently. The latter might actually be more important!
mooreds 5y ago
> An interesting corollary is that certain types of business are no longer economically viable. Or are no longer viable with US based software talent. I know a company that couldn't seem to keep/hire/find US based talent. Now they employ a couple folks from South America. The company gets competent developers and the folks from SA get jobs that they are happy with.
- notsureaboutpg 5y ago
  You can't keep / hire / find US software devs because you have other problems as a business. I've anecdotally seen a business do the exact same thing here. It works for a year or two max (when the salary is enough to keep the new devs happy). Many many US software devs know they could make more somewhere else but are comfortable where they are and have more than enough money to live happily and most importantly like what they do or feel connected to their work or some aspect of their work. That will eventually happen to your SA devs (and more quickly than to NA devs). Once they are comfortable, have more than enough money, they will file out of your company because you haven't fixed the problems that caused you to have talent issues in the first place, or they will demand more and leave when you can't afford it.
tootie 5y ago
I'm worried about my department. I run a small but earnest tech team at a non-profit. We pay the low end of market rate because we simply don't have tons of cash. We've managed to retain a solid team just on culture and having a positive mission. As the pandemic ebbs we've already lost some critical people. And leadership are stumbling through office reopening that is alienating more people. I'm genuinely worried the team will disintegrate and we'll just migrate everything to vendors.

walshemj 5y ago

Old school "media" agencies (all the big names) just don't get this this isnt the "mad men" days of the 1960's

lima 5y ago

Many people are indeed willing to work below market wages in exchange for working on something meaningful to them.

echelon 5y ago
Game developers are a classic example. They're paid trash salaries and treated like vermin.

benhurmarcel 5y ago

Those would be viable if done by an organization outside the US. Comp is still quite low in many countries, including in the "first" world (like western Europe).

tikhonj 5y ago

There are a lot of ways to compete besides salary, but my experience is that companies paying below-market-rate salaries tend to be less competitive on other axes too—with the exception of fields like research that have no trouble attracting far more superb candidates than the field can take. In my experience, autonomy, impact, psychological safety, remote work and flexible hours can all make up for substantial differences in pay, and would make the team more productive to boot. These are all aspects of the job a company can directly control; I'm not even talking about things like prestige, "mission" or super-deep technical problems. And yet, it seems like these aspects are all positively correlated with pay: higher-paid positions also come with more respect and a better work experience. What's keeping companies from changing this? Trust and respect go a long way. Of course, everyone and their dog claims they have a great culture, so a team would need a way to show rather than tell, but that's an eminently solvable problem. I've seen this work first-hand. For the same level of pay, hiring people on a Haskell project was markedly easier than other projects at the same company: people actively want to use Haskell and it also acts as a real signal that the team is willing to do things differently. The latter might actually be more important!

mooreds 5y ago

> An interesting corollary is that certain types of business are no longer economically viable. Or are no longer viable with US based software talent. I know a company that couldn't seem to keep/hire/find US based talent. Now they employ a couple folks from South America. The company gets competent developers and the folks from SA get jobs that they are happy with.

notsureaboutpg 5y ago
You can't keep / hire / find US software devs because you have other problems as a business. I've anecdotally seen a business do the exact same thing here. It works for a year or two max (when the salary is enough to keep the new devs happy). Many many US software devs know they could make more somewhere else but are comfortable where they are and have more than enough money to live happily and most importantly like what they do or feel connected to their work or some aspect of their work. That will eventually happen to your SA devs (and more quickly than to NA devs). Once they are comfortable, have more than enough money, they will file out of your company because you haven't fixed the problems that caused you to have talent issues in the first place, or they will demand more and leave when you can't afford it.

tootie 5y ago

I'm worried about my department. I run a small but earnest tech team at a non-profit. We pay the low end of market rate because we simply don't have tons of cash. We've managed to retain a solid team just on culture and having a positive mission. As the pandemic ebbs we've already lost some critical people. And leadership are stumbling through office reopening that is alienating more people. I'm genuinely worried the team will disintegrate and we'll just migrate everything to vendors.