3 ms·
Just a nitpick about consultancy shops -- I've had a chance of working in one in eastern europe and noticed that it's approach to quality was way better than cl
by deepsun 2y ago
Just a nitpick about consultancy shops -- I've had a chance of working in one in eastern europe and noticed that it's approach to quality was way better than client's. It also helped that client paid by hours, so consultancy company was incentivized to spend more time on refactorings, improvals and testing (with constant pushback from client).
So I don't buy the consultancy company sentiment, it always boils down to engineers and incentives.
- ethbr1 2y agoHow big was the one you worked for? In my experience, smaller ones tend to align incentives better. Once they grow past a certain size though, it's a labor arbitrage game. Bill client X, staff with resources costing Y (and over-represented), profit = X-Y, minimize Y to maximize profit. PwC / IBM Global Services wasn't offering the best and brightest. (Outside of aforementioned tiger teams)
- deepsun 2y agoI agree with you in general, although my case was the other way around. My company was 10k+ people. But my client was probably the most technically advanced company at that time, with famously hard interviews for their own employees. My employer also didn't want to lose the client (it was beginning of collaboration), and since everyone wanted to work there (and move to US+California) my shop applied pretty strong filter for their own heads, even before sending them to client's vendor-interview. And client was very-very happy with the quality, and that we didn't fight for promotions and could maintain very important, but promotion-poor projects. Up to the point that client trusted to completely gave couple of projects fully to my shop. When you don't need to fight for promotions, code quality also improves.