Gemini generated image
In the tech industry, these three words are supposed to represent value. But the real question is: Value for whom?
Let’s break down both sides of the equation, starting from the root of the problem:
The Client
A client has needs (problems to solve or features to build) and goes looking for a CAPABLE provider to address them. But here is the catch: custom software isn’t a product you buy off the shelf. You are essentially buying promises. You sign a contract and start paying for something that might be delivered in the future.
In an ideal world, the client would pay only after delivery, and only if they are happy with the result. Let’s face it, that almost never happens in tech. Because of this inherent risk of buying a “promise,” clients naturally want to bid low during negotiations.
The Provider
To convince (or trick) the client into committing, agencies and freelancers use tech titles. The word “SENIOR” is thrown around constantly to justify higher billing rates. But in my eyes, “Senior” doesn’t guarantee a certainty of delivery, it just represents a slightly higher probability of it, if any...
Providers are forced into a “Yes, sir!” mentality just to keep the lights on. You know the old saying: Never say “I can’t,” just say “Let’s see.” And just like that, the “ Senior Developer” marketing balloon is inflated to close the sale.
The Solution is Simple: Accountability
The fix to this broken system is Accountability. Before starting any project, four critical questions need to be answered:
- What happens if the provider does not fulfill their promises?
- What happens if the client does not fulfill their financial commitments after the provider delivers?
- What happens when the client cannot actually afford the true cost of the solution?
- What happens when the provider cannot afford the cost of failing to deliver?
If these four points are strictly checked and addressed, the artificial hierarchy of SENIOR , MID , and JUNIOR becomes completely obsolete.
Instead, those marketing titles are replaced by the only two labels that actually matter in the real world: CAPABLE and INCAPABLE of fulfilling the contract.
You might ask: “Okay, but what happens to Mid and Junior developers then? Everyone has to start somewhere.”
Exactly. Everyone starts somewhere. But there are different scopes of needs in the market. A simple landing page has a different risk profile than a complex enterprise backend. The raw difficulty of the project will naturally segregate the CAPABLE from the INCAPABLE for that specific task. You don’t need a deflated “Junior” balloon to tell you who can handle a basic bug fix, just like you don’t need an inflated “Senior” balloon to prove who can architect a system. You just need someone who is capable of delivering what they promised.
Committing to those four points guarantees that an INCAPABLE provider will not commit to something above their skill level, because if they do, they are the ones who will ultimately pay for it.
This shifts the entire dynamic for both parties. Providers are constrained to take on only the projects they can actually deliver, and clients are driven to contract only the providers who can genuinely solve their problems.
Of course this is not enough, both client and provider need experience and wisdom to avoid unpleasant situations by making good decisions.
Top comments (0)