4 ms·
The other problem is with overhead 2 half time employees != 1 full time employee. There is the extra equipment cost, benefits (perhaps), management overhead etc
by yibg 5y ago
The other problem is with overhead 2 half time employees != 1 full time employee. There is the extra equipment cost, benefits (perhaps), management overhead etc. e.g. If I replace a team of 7 full time engineers with 14 half time engineers, do I keep 1 manager? That seems like a very large team for 1 person to handle, so now maybe I need another manager too. From a purely economic perspective hiring half time engineers at half the comp just doesn't seem to make sense.
You can argue that half time engineers are more than half as productive as a full time engineer because as others have said full time engineers don't work a full 8 hours anyways. While theoretically that's true, as I originally posted, that's not what I've seen. Based on my anecdotal experience, half time engineers are less than half as productive as a full time engineer.
So from both a productivity and economic perspective, it hasn't made sense.
- Aeolun 5y agoI think the idea is that you replace a team of 7 full-time engineers with 7 half-time engineers, and get 80% of the benefits at 50% of the cost.
- yibg 5y agoThat's the theory, but like I said for us it hasn't really worked out like that. Maybe we're doing something wrong so who knows.
- ido 5y agoIt won’t be 50% of the cost due to overheads like said above, it may be more like 60%+. Another factor is that often the cost of developers is not the most significant factor. If a company can get say $100m of value out of $10m of salary cost on engineers, it doesn’t really make sense to instead spend $6m to get $80m of value. And just adding more people isn’t easy as each person increases communication overhead.