[LRUG] Hiring a pair rather than an individual contractor
Jasim A Basheer
jasim.ab at gmail.com
Wed Dec 18 04:54:14 PST 2013
Hi Tim,
I'm a developer-partner at Nilenso Software (http://nilenso.com/). We are
an employee-owned software co-operative based out of Bangalore, India. Most
of our work is remote and our team sizes are almost always even numbered.
Before we start an engagement with a client, we make it explicit that we
pair program, do TDD, and follow agile. We charge a blended rate for our
pairs - this accounts for the difference in experience level. We don't have
to sell pairing to clients who have previous experience in an agile/extreme
environment since they already understand the value it brings.
One of our recent work was a rescue project - the codebase was a ball of
mud, the devs who built it thought writing tests was a waste of time, and
the lack of any kind of encapsulation was described to be 'functional'. We
had to rebuild the entire system from scratch after a failed and costly
attempt at reusing the existing codebase. Having learned about the
importance of code quality through an expensive experience, this client was
particularly happy about the XP practices that we followed.
We haven't had much difficulty even with clients who have little prior
experience building software for the web. Most of our work comes from one
happy client referring another. This ensures that there is a fair amount of
trust in the relationship that we will do the right thing for their
business.
As to our pairing practice, we pair when it makes sense (which is most of
the time). We also use our judgement to solo on things that are either rote
work, or complex spikes where it is better to think independently and
discuss later. Most of this is transparent to the client, but is never made
a big deal out of.
It also helps that we discuss our velocity frequently with the client so
that they have a sense of the progress we are making. They also appreciate
the fact that at least two people who share the same context are involved
during discussions. Everyone is happy as long as we are delivering value
and it should be apparent to the client in a couple of iterations.
However as Louis mentioned, we work mostly with startups who are already
happy to do remote. Our experience might not be representative of
conventional organisations with outdated people policies.
On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 5:38 PM, Louis Goff-Beardsley <louisror at gmail.com>wrote:
> · From a recruitment perspective I’d say in 2013 around 20% of
> the contract requirements I’ve had were from companies which would be open
> to at least discussing this..
>
> · I’m not sure if you could negotiate a day rate for both
> developers high enough to make it worthwhile until you’ve proved that its
> more effective than one remote developer. Might have to take a bit of a hit
> in the first couple of contracts until the junior developer is productive.
>
> · The companies which would go for this are open minded teams
> which don’t have a problem with remote workers, more established teams
> which typically hire through HR departments and look for onsite developers
> are going to take issue.
>
> · In the last year I have had success in hiring pairs of
> developers into companies, although in both cases it was pairs of senior
> remote developers who had long histories of working together.
>
> · Might be companies are interested in this for hiring senior
> perm remote developers with a junior pair located near to them (rather than
> contract, as its more of an investment for the company).
>
> · Merry Christmas.
>
>
>
> Best
>
> *Louis Goff-Beardsley*
>
>
>
> *“You know I'm not a fan of recruitment consultants, right? @LouisRoR is
> good. You should talk to him if you're looking for Ruby work or staff” **Paul
> Robinson – Senior Ruby-on-Rails Developer & CTO - @P7R*<https://twitter.com/p7r/status/291537402084864001>
>
> http://goo.gl/WvuTj
>
> [Louis Goff-Beardsley]
>
> > Ultra-Specialised Independent Ruby-on-Rails Recruitment.
>
> > Software Sales, Business Development & AC Acquisition for the RoR
> community.
>
> > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/louisbeardsley
>
> > Skype: LouisGB1 - Googletalk/Jabba: LouisRoR at gmail.com
>
> > Email: LouisRoR at gmail.com
>
> > Mobile: 07449 324 851 ¦ Land Line: 01183 xxx xxx
>
> > Twitter:@LouisRoR <https://twitter.com/#!/LouisRoR> – Below is ASCII
> Art that will go totally wrong in plain text :(
>
> *__________ __ __ __________ *
>
> *\______ \_____ |__| | ______ \______ \ ____ ____ *
>
> * | _/\__ \ | | | / ___/ | _// __ \_/ ___\ *
>
> * | | \ / __ \| | |__\___ \ | | \ ___/\ \___ *
>
> * |____|_ /(____ /__|____/____ > |____|_ /\___ >\___ >*
>
> * \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ *
>
>
>
> IRC: LouisRoR - irc.freenode.org #LRUG, #NWRUG, #ruby, #rubyonrails
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
> Description: Description: Description: Description:
> http://download.skype.com/share/skypebuttons/buttons/add_green_transparent_118x23.gif][image:
> Description: Description: Description: Description: Description:
> Description:
> file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/louis.beardsley/Desktop/LouisRoRTag.JPG]<https://twitter.com/#!/LouisRoR>
>
>
>
>
>
> *“I was speaking to [Senior Ruby Developer] recently about a variety of
> things and he mentioned your name. In fact he recommended you as a
> recruiter. *Actually* recommended too, not as in "he's not as evil as the
> rest", but as in "you really should speak to this guy first"”*
>
>
>
>
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> This email (and any attachment) may be confidential and legally privileged.
> Access and/or use by others is unauthorised and may be unlawful. This
> message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
> individual named. Contents of this email should not be disseminated,
> distributed or copied.
>
>
>
> *From:* chat-bounces at lists.lrug.org [mailto:chat-bounces at lists.lrug.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Tim Cowlishaw
> *Sent:* 17 December 2013 12:20
> *To:* Ruby Group
> *Subject:* [LRUG] Hiring a pair rather than an individual contractor
>
>
>
> Inspired by Ali's 'Technical Intern' job ad, I've got a few questions for
> those of you who hire independent contract engineers!
>
>
>
> Some context: I've thought a great deal about stsarting an initiative like
> Ali's, whereby I take on a more junior engineer to pair with me on contract
> work. Being a freelancer is an insane privilege, and I've thought it'd be a
> great opportunity to both help train people starting out on a career in
> software, as well as encouraging more people to work independently who
> might not otherwise consider it, or have the opportunity to do so.
>
>
>
> With that in mind, I'd be very interested to know, from those of you who
> hire contractors, whether:
>
>
>
> (1) You'd be open to the idea of hiring a mixed-ability pair in place of
> an individual engineer? Would such an arrangement work within the structure
> of your organization?
>
> (2) You'd perceive this is an arrangement with potential productivity
> gains (or just as a deadweight loss since the more experienced engineer
> would spend some time coaching the less experienced one). What sort of
> multiplier would you be prepared to attach to the cost of a single engineer
> for such an arrangement?
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Tim.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chat mailing list
> Chat at lists.lrug.org
> http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
>
>
Best,
--
Jasim A Basheer -- http://nilenso.com
http://twitter.com/jasim_ab
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20131218/e016c8fb/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1401 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20131218/e016c8fb/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1918 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20131218/e016c8fb/attachment.gif>
More information about the Chat
mailing list