DEV Community

Discussion on: Why Do Companies Ask For Passion?

Collapse
 
mccurcio profile image
Matt Curcio

How is excellence measured in your company and how is it rewarded.

Ben, you have opened up the floor to this VERY interesting question. So...

What are the answers you have seen in your travels?

Collapse
 
bdelespierre profile image
Benjamin Delespierre • Edited

Well most of the time they hit me with the old "Errrrrrr..." because they have never thought about it (that's about 70% of the companies I've met.) They simply believe that a fair compensation is enough for their developpers to give 100%. I personnaly doubt it but it's debatable.

A tiny 5% have a direct incentive with clear, well defined objectives and associated bonuses.

The rest of them (25%) simply have packages for the overall enterprise / team / personnal performance. That is to say IF the company performs well AND the team has delivered on time AND your annual meeting with your manager went well, then MAYBE you'll get a few hundreds bucks.

Thread Thread
 
mccurcio profile image
Matt Curcio • Edited

Interesting, so it seems like the majority (70%) don't have a clue(so to speak). The rest have some incentives while only a small portion (5% in this anecdotal survey) have clear objectives and bonuses, i.e. have their shite together.

In my experience working with other companies outside hi-tech that sounds about right. lol

Thread Thread
 
bdelespierre profile image
Benjamin Delespierre • Edited

Most companies view tech as a cost center whose function is to provide services to the rest of the company. It doesn't produce value by itself. Value is only created when software is being used by the rest of the company or its clients.

In this context it is very difficult to provide an incentive for developpers to generate more value because there is no direct value produced by them in the first place. Software is only a cost that needs to be lowered - just like refilling your tank with gasoline, who cares if it's better gasoline as long as the car goes, right?

By contrast it's very easy to boost sales by increasing the cut (bonus) the salespeople get, because for every deal signed, there's an amount in dollar attached to it.

Note this is merely an accounting perspective but sadly, most companies understand tech that way as far as I know...

Thread Thread
 
mccurcio profile image
Matt Curcio • Edited

Interesting, the programmer/company model you describe is almost exactly how I would describe the Biotech research company model.

Basic and pre-clinical research which includes animal testing are treated exactly the same. These researchers are viewed as 'overhead' even though they are creating future pipelines and products. The fewer resources a company can give to this branch of the company and the quicker these scientists can produce anything close to a product the better overall for the company. Ironically, historically 'basic' research over the last century has actually been the area where science has (arguably) achieved the largest gains.

Similarly, those in Manufacturing/production, for example those making vaccines for people, are viewed as the most valuable employees by upper management.

A friend of mine summed this idea up by saying. Manufacturers of drug substances are the closest to the cash cow. The father one is away from that cash cow the less important you are.

The model is not just tech but maybe any science endeavor when it meets business. lol

Thread Thread
 
bdelespierre profile image
Benjamin Delespierre

That's what happens when CEOs are accountants... Sometimes hired by other accountants (the shareholders & investors) to merely balance the books and cut costs. All those guys see and understand are spreadsheet, business plans, and financial reports.

Sometimes (5% of the time?), a visionnary CEO may convince them to bet on ideas, innovation, research etc. But most of the time they'll stick to the safe route. They'd rather have $1 with 100% certainty than $100 with 1% certainty.

Also the bigger the company, the stronger the effect. Rendering some of them incapable of innovating because of the fear factor and the "what ifs".

So yeah, the farther you are from the "cash cow", the less the value is tangible, both in minds (it's difficult to understand what those shady scientists are up to, we don't understand a word of these devs mumbo-jumbo...) AND in the spreadsheets - they produce derivative value, not actual value, that is to say value whose yield depend on something else.

Thread Thread
 
mccurcio profile image
Matt Curcio

The more things change,
The more things stay the same.
Haha