New answers tagged

3

My take is this: The main argument for outsourcing is that you don't have to take on staff, which is a long-term investment. If you do a one-off software development thing, you probably want to outsource, because those developers wouldn't have anything to do afterwards (most of them, you'll probably need one for bugfixing and updates). The main argument ...


48

If it’s a core business function — do it yourself, no matter what. There's a wonderful essay written by Joel Spolsky called In Defense of not Invented Here Syndrome. I'll quote some of it here. Indeed during the recent dotcom mania a bunch of quack business writers suggested that the company of the future would be totally virtual — just a trendy couple ...


31

In some comments, the OP has stated that I have no experience and idea about the project development needs after it successfully launched. and this is my first experience and don't know having such website application will need what requirements in future(after it launched successfully) As a first time entrepreneur, you might think that you finish ...


27

From somebody who has done both: Don't outsource to save money. Do it because you need more talent than you can find in your own location. Outsourcing requires remarkable clarity on what you want, and it requires communicating that clear vision, by documents, talks, explanations. If you outsource you need a strong product manager to keep in constant ...


4

I'd say only outsource if you have a very clear definition of what you want, so you can give them a specification, and you can both see and agree when it's done. If you don't have this, you'll spend more time haggling over whether something is a bug (i.e. already paid for) or an enhancement (i.e. more money) than on actual work. Another option is a ...


1

What Kilisi and BigMadAndy said, but it's worth considering another angle. If you're involved in a product that will have a warranty and customer support period, it makes sense to have people in house who are familiar with the development and can suggest solutions. If you're planning a version 2.0, in house development will save you time teaching a [...


46

It's mainly about the stability/ duration of your needs. If you know you will need a full-time person to work for you over the next years, it frequently makes sense to employ one. By employing someone directly your initial cost is higher. It includes onboarding, providing the person resources such as a laptop, etc. But the cost pays out when the person turns ...


7

Outsourcing gives you less control and even less knowledge of the people usually. The big advantage is cost and if you don't have enough ongoing work to keep full time devs productive. So the bigger the company and product line, the more sense it makes to do inhouse. Things like product or information security are factors as well. Handing your product to ...


6

Several other answers have already explained what you would need to offer in order to entice experienced developers, so I won't go into that. The other half of the picture is that you're apparently interviewing the wrong people: 1- The expert developers who come for meeting but when they find this is a new company and there is no other member teams, they ...


25

I'm the developer you want. I've been a part of large companies (FB, Amazon) and 5 startups, 4 of which sold. I was a lead at several of them. So I'll tell you what I would want to come to work for another young startup: I want a salary. I can't work for nothing. I'm willing to take a bit less than a big company would pay me, but I want something in ...


6

What do you offer? A bigger say in development and more freedom? One of the bigger upsides of startups. But you mention you worry about coowners decisions, which implies you want full controll. Reading between the lines, this could mean people get less (!) freedom to do what they think is right than in a big coprporation. I worked in a founderowned business....


5

The thing about experienced developers is that they have their "pick of the litter", so to speak. They can work anywhere they want, so why should that be you? Working for a startup comes with a lot of risk, specifically the risk of failure. If I go to work for Google, I know that in 5-10 years I will 100% still have a job (modulo being fired). If I go to ...


1

I would suggest rather than finding an employee, you find a business partner. Preferably one with all the technical skills. Then after that you look to hire a larger team of employees. Maybe offering equity would help you with the first option.


56

I think you're approaching this the wrong way. The expert developers who come for meeting but when they find this is a new company and there is no other member teams, they give up and leave, and the main thing they say is "we prefer to work for a famous company with big teams" ... why would they? You're asking them to not work at a stable company, ...


12

I am a software engineer having 10+ years of experience. So I am writing this answer having the imagination to face this situation. So of course, I will not join a start-up company because of the associated risk of closing that company at any time. But as my office work is only 7 hours, so I have plenty of time. As I want to earn some extra money, I will ...


0

To me, it would seem logical to have a set maximum for salary increases between positions (at least before requiring serious approval / justification and review), because with that, you can manage employee's expectations of what they'll get with that promotion. For example, if the employee thinks he's going to get $30k more per year as a raise, and you don'...


0

Rationale assumes a strategic decision made deliberately We think of companies as careful, methodical, and calculating. They aren’t. I’m in a meeting currently where we are being asked to provide a deadline for project completion. this follows a meeting where we spent two hours estimating poorly defined tasks for the sprint. What is the definition of ...


1

Many companies have policies on the percentage of increase when transferring employees, i.e., is this a lateral transfer, a promotion, is this a transfer to a revenue generating position, is this a lateral move with additional responsibilities; and the increase amount/percentage, would be aligned to the type of move. A transfer that is considered a ...


0

Keep in mind, if you choose to report this action to your manager or department head, you may have some rights. It is not really a whistleblower situation, however, you can be offended as a person o the same age range as the applicant facing discrimination. YOu may be able to claim age discrimination as well. If you are fired or harassed as a result, you may ...


8

If both positions are open now, fill them now. You don't know how long it will take to fill each position. The sooner you hire, the sooner the ramp up period will be complete and the new devs can really contribute to your workload. Where there are common ramp-up, you can get a 2-for-1. When you have something to show 1 dev, you can call the other over ...


Top 50 recent answers are included