[PLUG] Hire the Best

[Steve Bonds]

Good discussion, John!

More comments below.

On Fri, 12 Jul 2002, John Telford John at JohnTelford.com XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX wrote:

> Linux, UNIX, and network professionals seeking work in the Portland are
> are running into the "buyers" market mentality.
> 
> This is illustrated by a recent Portland Area Cisco Users Group mailing
> list posting by a hiring manager, containing the following statement:
> 
> "..you are only worth what the market will bear, and what someone is
> willing to pay you."

Unfortunately, this is fairly true and does not invalidate the rest of
your argument.  It really is simple supply and demand.

If there are only a few top-level engineers available then a bidding war
erupts as people compete to bribe these folks out of their
positions.  Basic economics says when demand vastly exceeds the supply of
a "widget" (no, not X11... ;-) the equilibrium price will be quite high.

If the reverse is true and there are lots of top-level engineers looking
for work, there is no need for a bidding war and in fact after some months
many of these top engineers will be getting desperate and will be working
for much less than they would normally do.  Again basic econ, supply
exceeds demand and the equilibrium price will be quite low.

This defines "what the market will bear".

Now we get into the fun part "what someone is willing to pay you".

Companies generally spend lots of money to identify the above market
equilibrium prices on a semi-regular basis.  Once that is accomplished,
it's ususally up to to the hiring manager or his boss(es) to decide if
they want to pay above or below that rate based on what they presently
have and what they need.

For example, if a company is lucky enough to have several senior people
and just needs to round out their workforce, they may only offer a small
amount of money on the understanding that the first couple of people might
get shooed out after only a couple of months.

If they need to get someone in who will hit the ground running, and don't
want to deal with re-hiring later, then they should offer above that
equilibrium (market) price.

> Most successful managers know, or learn by experience, that hiring the
> best people for $X pays off *much* better than hiring less than the
> best for $<X.  Usually the best people are insulted by offers of $<X.  
> The manager and company making the offer soon earn the reputation of
> being cheap.  This is a liability in a "small town" like Portland
> where the word quickly get around.

Some companies know this and will hire above market rates, hoping to find
good people.  Generally these same smart companies are vicious when it
comes to firing people who do not perform.  (If not, they'll quickly find
themselves in a bad situation-- spending lots more than they need to for
inferior people.)

Cheapskate companies looking for a deal generally have to suffer enormous
turnover and a bad reputation.  They will only find people who have been
unable to get hired or stay hired at the other companies.

> Some managers suffering from magical thinking are applying a mythical
> man-month principle by thinking that hiring two for the price of one
> produces twice the work.  The fallacy of this thinking was exposed
> more than 25 years ago by Frederick P. Brooks in the classic "The
> Mythical Man-Month."  Twenty years later, the first revised edition of
> this book reaffirms the original principles.

I wish more people would read and believe that book.  Unfortunately, most
project managers like to apply simple division to tough projects.  This is
the same flawed logic that leads to PMs figuring if one woman can have a
baby in nine months, then nine should be able to do it in one month.

> The best people bring a wealth of experience and depth of
> understanding to a job that lesser experienced people are lacking.  
> It's wishful thinking that sending a lesser experienced person off to
> training will close the gap.

If you can find the right junior people this can actually work out-- but
it's no substitute for good mentoring from a senior person or two.

The problem is finding smart, motivated junior folks who will actually
learn.  There's no way to find this on a resume.

> There's no substitute for experience and depth of understanding.  
> Paying the price is a bargain.  First rate managers know this.  They
> know that the best people usually out performs several lesser
> experienced people combined.  What a bargain!

Yes, junior folks should be thought of as a supplement to shed "busy
work" load from the senior folks-- not as a replacement.

Fun discussion.  Maybe I should go look for that other list. ;-)

  -- Steve