About the IT market in Russia to be honest

In the past few years, my worries about the Russian IT market have only intensified. It all started with the crisis of the ruble in 2014 (and maybe even earlier), and since then I have not had the feeling that many Russian companies, especially provincial ones, blindfolded themselves, stuffed their ears with cotton and are still trying to pretend that nothing is happening . I talked a lot with different companies, with HR, with developers, and made a list of disappointing theses about what constitutes both the programmer market and the development culture in general, because these are interrelated things. According to my subjective estimates, these theses are true for ~ 60% of Russian companies, although it would seem that those other 40% of companies that we know and love should have been thought-provoking. But I very much suspect that these 60% simply rely on Russian “maybe”,willful blindness , and sometimes deliberately muddy water. So honestly, what happens?

Disclaimer 1 . There will be no links, no names, no proofs. As you know, the Internet can find confirmation or refutation of any thesis, so I do not see much in that sense, as long as it is not a dissertation, but an opinion. My goal is to provide another point of view based ~~on personal experience of faith~~ on personal experience.

Disclaimer 2 . The article provides a collective image. It is hardly to be expected that there is a 100% coincidence with at least one company. Some features may occur here or there; It is not important that there are any specific companies with these problems. It is important that the problems themselves exist, and we need to talk about them.

About recruitment agencies and HR

Let's start with them. It is difficult to blame them, they are only intermediaries who do not have real power, they spin as they can, and often they use not very good methods to achieve their goals hidden from us. It must be said that the goal of the CA is to earn money, and not to develop our market at all, so it’s worth to be very skeptical about their opinion. First of all, these are various “studies” of wages in IT. I have not seen a single study that would be at least plausible. What is wrong with them? Here are the problems:

Various data manipulations are allowed, designed to bring the numbers in line with the goal. There are three such goals:
- Advertising programmer courses. The average salary is slightly higher than in competitive research. There are fatty job-zamanushki to young neophyte fulfilled the greatest desire to become a programmer in a month (six months, a year).
- Formation of a false (undervalued) view of candidates about the market. The average salary is slightly lower than other studies. After all, you have to sell low-paid positions, but who will bite them if they know that they are low paid? Therefore, we pretend that this is the norm.
- Advertising portal. Often the numbers are generally incomprehensible and strange, just to attract attention on this burning issue.
The fact of the global market is completely ignored. Moreover, HR doesn’t seem to know that there are at least three markets: native Russian (RFP up to 100K rubles for any category of developers), European (RFP from $ 3000 per June) and American (RFP from $ 6000 per June).
As a result, a large reservoir of remote workers, freelancers and those who left is ignored. Yes, yes, they should also be included in the agenda, because they form the trends in the market in which we live and which must be considered. Perhaps the SCs do not know anything about this segment, since they do not recognize any data, except from their own portal, and all this movement with freelancing, remote workers and immigrants is happening, of course, in completely different places.
I suspect that the sample gets all sorts of strange vacancies from ZP 20 - 40 TR This is also a market, another one, but this is something parochial, artisanal, purely provincial. I don’t think that such companies should be taken seriously when we talk about professional development.

It is worth noting that 100K rubles (less than 2K $) is a kind of psychological frontier that Russian companies slowly began to overcome after 2014: not all, and not immediately, would not have started if the truly biblical outcome of the developers had not started. The increase in salary in the market is slow, with a grinding of teeth, reluctantly, through the invention of additional workload, through an increase in the requirements for candidates, through increased mental pressure on workers. Like, if you get 120K rubles, then plow by 120%, that is, the hour is reduced to the same figures as before the increase. To keep wages, various tricks are applied, both within companies and in the general media space, and they are trying to convince us that it cannot be otherwise, and this is in 2018. But first things first.

About vacancies and jobs

Looking through vacancies and attending interviews, you can make a number of interesting observations.

Each, absolutely every company (from global brands to sharashkin offices) employs “the best developers”, “a strong team of professionals”, “a solid team of experts in their field”, and it seems that other developers simply do not exist. Yes, this is marketing, but so fake that I'm not sure how it works at all.
“Competitive” is called any salary, regardless of the amount. Often, in such vacancies, the plug is not even indicated, but we can safely assume that the RFP will be in the area of “psychological frontier” of 100K rubles and less. Because if it were truly competitive, the company would have put it out and attracted candidates to it.
For vacancies with a slightly higher pay (for example, $ 2K), excessive demands are made: a super-experienced rock-star is required, with a stack of technologies, one list of which is half the text of the job. You can be sure that the demand will be really tough.
There are places to be interviews whose complexity is not commensurate with the promised conditions and the work that will have to be done. Often tedious, many hours, with many days of test tasks in addition. The purpose of such qualifying tests is to play on cognitive distortion “ rationalization after purchase". If the candidate has gone through all the unreasonably tough stages of selection, he will justify his choice in one way or another: with his coolness, big name of the company, good office, and so on. As a result, he will stay longer at this place, and the employer will have an additional lever of influence. Needless to say, candidates who know the price of their time often refuse these games and simply go to work for better conditions elsewhere. Therefore, the thesis of selecting only the best personnel looks implausible; Moreover, in most cases, you will have to deal with something mundane, mundane, not requiring great qualifications.
Companies are trying to be attractive, at least externally. But what is characteristic: they do it ... let's say, alternatively . For fun, the employee will be alternatively giftedthis company. Tea, coffee and cookies, a comfortable office, an equipped workplace are presented as a worthy replacement for the salary difference, although in reality this is only a preventive factor. If the average salary is still perceived with understanding (the richer are the more happy - and the client is found), then the lack of comfort will immediately become a talk of the town, and the company's reputation will plummet. What adequate developer would want to sit on the crooked Soviet chair in a damp basement behind the old broken “calculator” of the 2000s with a limit of 500Mb per month on the Internet? Therefore, employers have no choice but to provide these “buns” by default. Perhaps this is just a necessary indicator that the company is not a “sharashkin office”, but I can’t say that this is an advantage over competitors.
The “benefits” can be a social package, fitness compensation, foreign language courses and conferences. But I very much suspect that if there was a choice - either this or competitive salary, then no one would even think about it. Because fitness is fitness, and if, God forbid, some kind of trouble happens, then all good medicine is not here and not for rubles. And this is despite the fact that the salary in the area of “psychological frontier” is too low to save for a serious operation, not to mention inflation and risks.
It is strange that the “white” salary (it’s also a clearance under the Labor Code), leave and sick leave are also presented as “buns”, although they are required by law.
Large corporations seek to compensate for a small salary with a big name. And in general, in their own way, they are entitled. But candidates also begin to treat this accordingly: “I will work a year, I will gain experience, and I will fall to the place where I pay better”. Also honest, fair position. Nothing personal, only business, and so do all rational people. But for some reason, it is programmers who are blamed for changing jobs like gloves, and the opinion is spreading that this is bad, that such candidates are flawed in some sense. Not at all. There is only one life, and our most valuable resource is time. We have the right to sell it as much as we deem it necessary, whether you like it or not.
And they do not want to. Some Russian companies, refusing to accept the interests of developers, were seen colluding among themselves and with personnel agencies for the purpose of artificial retention of salary and personnel. The AC has instructions not to make cross-offers to candidates from collateral companies. If you work in company “A”, then you will not receive job offers in “B”, and vice versa. Nobody will tell you about this, but HR girls sometimes “talk”. Awl in the bag, as they say, do not hide. And of course, the question arises, what are they still agreeing behind our backs.

About company behavior

I understand that the economy is weak, the ruble market is small and insolvent, companies have no money, and they manage their funds as they see fit. This is true, each side pursues its own interests. But there are things that I still do not understand.

I do not understand why the crying about the lack of personnel continues, that the developers are staring and asking too much, and that out of fifty candidates only one is sensible. That is, there are really not enough programmers, the best of them leave the Russian market in droves. It is not clear what "whiners" generally hope for. The train with the programmers has already left. If employers realized in 2014 and in 2015 and doubled the ruble RFP, compensating for the loss of developers' savings and income, the outflow would not be so dramatic, and in the long run, by 2018, the problem would be less pronounced. However, immediately after the collapse, a naive one sounded “We will increase, and in a year the ruble will return its positions, and the developers will be overpaid”. Russian “maybe” as it is, along with short-sightedness. After all, the developers felt that being underpaid now is worse than to be reduced because of overpayment through the mythical year, when the dollar returns to 30 rubles for the president again. This situation shows that most companies do not take into account the interests of employees, which is generally characteristic of Russian culture (not just development).
From the preceding implies the following “I do not understand.” I do not understand why suffering companies simply whine and do not try to improve their attractiveness. Remember, what kind of cry went up when Sberbank (represented by Sberbank-Technologies) began to hunt developers, multiplying their RFP by two? Here and there there appeared various “exposing” and defamatory articles that they do not do this in our market, that it will bring him down, and so on and so forth. That's just what it means - “do not do that”? What illegal did Sberbank? Or is it customary to live by our “rules”, but he refused, ignoring the aforementioned collusion? Went against artificial restrictions simply because he could and wanted to be attractive in the sense of an employer? For me, this is the market, and attempts at its artificial regulation will be no more effective than a sieve holding water.
I also do not understand whether some companies understand the basic concept of a business. But it is simple and known even to a schoolboy: either a competing company, or it dies. Someone was lucky in the 90s and “zero” to seize an empty market, and now the situation has changed, and they poke like blind kittens, not knowing what to do. Someone is still looking for “blue oceans”, someone is engaged in dubious projects for putting dust in the eyes of investors, and managers responsible for strategy and development, work on the principle of Job Safety Driven Development, without ideas and inspiration. I see how good companies once miss one opportunity after another, do not bring out new products (even if they are being developed), are afraid to compete in the world market - in general, they are engaged in non-core activities. This is a slightly different story, rather even the entourage,

Here it is important to clarify that if a company is aimed at success, then the personnel policy will be appropriate. There is nothing more important than cadres, “cadres decide everything,” this is an axiom, no matter what anyone says. They need to be cherished and cherished, graze like cats. However, the Russian history of the proletariat is very rich, and since ancient times we have got different practices of personnel management, which by inertia are used in the IT world. Here are just a significant part of them, firstly, is outdated, and secondly, generally flawed in essence. These practices do not work, because the market is global, and developers can compare how it is done “there” and “here”. And why be surprised when ideological employees, whose knowledge, skills, unconventional outlook and determination could breathe new life, take their brains to where the environment is more friendly, where they are more necessary and in demand.the effect of broken windows becomes unnecessary and advanced developer. Let's see what is the Russian culture of development, and what factors influence it.

On the external culture of development and technology

Note. I will talk about the Russian culture, bearing in mind the culture established in those notorious 60% of companies. I will also talk about the Western culture of development, but the gradation here is not on a territorial basis, but on the progressiveness of the worldview as a whole. “Western” can be a culture in Japan, in China, in India, and even in Russia. It is even in some companies - but how much is this a common thing?

To begin with, the vast majority of open source technologies are not done here. It is likely that if you came up with technology (library, framework, approach ...), doing it in your free time, then you will not have the opportunity to develop it.

Firstly, the salary was so low that you didn’t have enough money for which you could live for six months or a year and work on the full time technology. Needless to say that many local startups start at the own expense of the founders, who have worked for several years in a software company and have accumulated the necessary initial capital? I am silent about options and share in the business, which gives a chance to any developer to hope for good prosperity in the future and do everything to implement it. We have no such practice as a class. A developer is not considered a partner, but simply a hired worker, and it would not occur to anyone to share with him a portion of his income in excess of his salary. As a result, we have what we have: the development of free technologies here is extremely difficult due to financial constraints.
Secondly, in the Russian culture of development there is no practice of supporting enthusiasts. If the company, in which the enthusiast works, does not see the usefulness of this technology right here and at this moment, then there will be no help: neither paid work hours, nor the advancement of this developer on the corporate ladder, nor the permission to use this technology. At the same time, in Western culture, this practice is quite common. Enthusiasts can take on staff, sponsor activities, offer resources for running in technology - even if the technology itself does not bring immediate benefits to the company right now. They understand that a contribution to a common cause is also a benefit, albeit an indirect one, and they are able to turn it in their favor; all participants in the process benefit. Western culture of development involves close integration and cooperation: between companies, between developers, between them and universities, and so on. This integration contributes to the development of technologies, creates new trends. The developer feels that he is part of the global progress that is happening here and now.
Thirdly, if you are engaged in outside activities for the benefit of society, then this activity will be simply ignored, and in particularly neglected cases it will even be subjected to heyt. And this, unfortunately, is not a joke. Once I asked a manager of a well-known company what he thinks about this, and he replied: “I know many inventors who were hired because they have some interesting product that has no practical use right now. It happens everywhere in the whole world. ”And further added:“ Just the thought that you are saying is categorically wrong. Because if you are an inventor who needs to be supported, who cannot support himself, then such an inventor is not needed. ” I see here a direct refusal to follow global traditions. Allegedly, the talent will find its way and he should be educated according to the “Brazilian system”, and not to think about any cooperation with him. Unfortunately, not every technology can be monetized, and many are written entirely simply because they have to be written, and not because they need to do business. We can also remember that to invent something is not enough, you need to engage in bringing to mind, marketing, promotion, creating a community, filling materials, go to conferences with reports, communicate with like-minded people. This all often requires money, but even more it takes time. If there was any business behind each technology, there would be much less of them, and the world would be completely different. It would be different if all the companies in the world were pursuing an ostrich policy. Not every technology can be monetized, but many are written simply because they have to be written, and not because they need to do business. We can also remember that to invent something is not enough, you need to engage in bringing to mind, marketing, promotion, creating a community, filling materials, go to conferences with reports, communicate with like-minded people. This all often requires money, but even more it takes time. If there was any business behind each technology, there would be much less of them, and the world would be completely different. It would be different if all the companies in the world were pursuing an ostrich policy. Not every technology can be monetized, but many are written simply because they have to be written, and not because they need to do business. We can also remember that to invent something is not enough, you need to engage in bringing to mind, marketing, promotion, creating a community, filling materials, go to conferences with reports, communicate with like-minded people. This all often requires money, but even more it takes time. If there was any business behind each technology, there would be much less of them, and the world would be completely different. It would be different if all the companies in the world were pursuing an ostrich policy. marketing, promotion, creating a community, filling materials, go to conferences with reports, communicate with like-minded people. This all often requires money, but even more it takes time. If there was any business behind each technology, there would be much less of them, and the world would be completely different. It would be different if all the companies in the world were pursuing an ostrich policy. marketing, promotion, creating a community, filling materials, go to conferences with reports, communicate with like-minded people. This all often requires money, but even more it takes time. If there was any business behind each technology, there would be much less of them, and the world would be completely different. It would be different if all the companies in the world were pursuing an ostrich policy.

On the internal culture of companies

Well, okay, no one is obliged to support enthusiasts, there is no such line in TC. Let it be so, the external aspect of the culture of development is poorly developed, integration is rather weak, and the market as a whole is five to seven years behind, and therefore not ready to commit to the common good. But after all, companies provide their employees with all the opportunities for development and growth! For their own advancement, they are doing everything to gain and retain the best personnel, to enable them to realize and earn for the company: money, reputation, competitive advantage! A ha ha ha. Not. It is time to discuss the inner aspect of culture.

In the conditions of outflow of professionals and increased risks, companies rely on antediluvian, but understandable and well-studied technologies. Any innovations are perceived as harmful and dangerous. These ideas are very strange, too incomprehensible, as if something did not work out, it is necessary to prohibit and not let go. Because if this overly advanced developer tomorrow runs off to a neighbor, being tempted by an increase of some pitiful 100% there, we will be in an awkward position, because none of the rest will be able to work with this code.
Therefore, with all assurances, companies need just performers, workhorses, completely loyal and unprincipled. In other words - average workers who are ready to work for the same salary as the cleaners in Europe who do not want to develop, who are not interested in programming, and whose horizons are limited to one simple, but very common technology. And such developers, of course, will justify their position, say that nothing else is needed, and bosses will stand behind and stroke them over their heads.
As a result, in teams there is a stagnation of views and competencies. Direct leaders and management are not interested in training staff more than is required for the performance of duties. Sometimes, of course, there are some events, internal lectures and reports, as well as employees are allowed to attend public meetings and conferences, but this is not enough. It is not enough to hear about the new technology - it must also be touched, twisted, and this is just not allowed. Only privately in your free time, at home and under the covers.
And in order to relieve the ardor of employees inspired by such events, the following factor comes into play. Terry authoritarianism. It would be all right if the really cool developers from whom we can all learn a lot became the leaders - but companies lose or even avoid them, and it’s more profitable to put the leaders of yesterday's middling companies, whose horizons are stuck at a mark of ten years ago, The lexicon consists of a solid “not needed”. This automatically achieves two goals: technologies are kept at a risk-free level, and employees are kept from developing and evacuating to more nourishing bread.

About toxicity

However, enthusiasm is so high that authoritarianism cannot overcome it. And here we come to the main characteristic of the Russian culture of development, which sharply distinguishes it from the western: extreme toxicity. This phenomenon haunts the professional websites of the Russian-speaking segment of the Internet, penetrates into working groups, affects management at all levels, and maybe even sits somewhere in the subcortex. If toxicity in Western culture is recognized as a serious obstacle to progress, and successfully fought against it, then in our reality it turns into a method designed to keep not very good companies afloat.

The initiative is punishable in the literal sense, mistakes are not forgiven, and dissent is strongly suppressed. This can be expressed in different ways: in the form of ostracism, public ridicule, discrediting of both the idea itself and the author. You can also put pressure on the weaknesses of the developers that everyone has, push them out and downplay them. Of course, with the use of demagogy and trampling common sense. Any values can be ignored in favor of vicious practices, even those that are declared explicitly: respect ideas, respect authors, allow employees to try, make mistakes, learn from mistakes, succeed. This is a normal approach to design as a creative profession. Unfortunately, HR, who must monitor the observance of values, are not capable, because they do not have real power.
Even under the level of toxicity, undercover games, “politics” and the substitution of concepts affect, and it doesn’t matter where it happens: within individual teams, entire departments or the entire company. As soon as window dressing and dusting in the eyes begin, the product being developed becomes useless, and therefore all development becomes impregnated with false. Unsustainable colleagues are involved in political games, and once good teams start to break down. “Potemkin villages” are growing, but real achievements are forgotten. In such an environment, there is no place for new ideas, or for advanced technologies, or for a benevolent culture.
Finally, it’s very bad if there is an inadequate leadership that adheres to the rhetoric “I’m boss, you are a fool”, “I’d better know”, “you don’t see the big picture”, “be silent and fear” Of course, it did not start yesterday or in IT, but there are no reasonable reasons why this should happen if the company wants to grow and attract the best staff. After all, self-respecting developers will not tolerate managerial outrage and scatter. Moreover, the market is a candidate one, and there are not enough programmers around the world. Moreover, the company pays not so much. Moreover, there is not much room for self-realization. Especially...

The described factors are absolutely illegal: it should not be so. Point. And hardly anyone will dispute this thesis. Unfortunately, there are a number of “allowed” methods that are used even in the best companies, but serve purposes other than those declared.

Corporate games with grades, appraisals, evaluation of developers. It is said that it is necessary for each to designate a career path, define “areas of growth” and mark achievements. To the results of certification is attached and salary. But the resource is limited, not enough for everyone, and therefore it is necessary to divide the developers into two groups: to whom to give and to whom not to give. And in order to justify such a division, for two weeks before certification, the owl is being pulled onto the globe. The algorithm is as follows. We praise the developers of the first group, constantly talk about their successes, note any strengths, ignore the weak, convince everyone of the significance of these colleagues, and sometimes even attribute to them common achievements. We do the opposite with the second group: we stick out their mistakes and weaknesses, ignore or degrade achievements, convince everyone that they are losers in life. Everything, The rationale for any results is ready. And if there was a goal - to increase the level of hostility and toxicity in the teams, then it was brilliantly achieved.
Hazing and self-assertion at the expense of others. If some person from the first group was promoted undeservedly, then he has a desire to justify his position. And he begins to “carry the light to the masses,” or rather, to broadcast his vision to the downstream employees. Alas, his vision usually consists of myths and delusions, one-sided look mixed with a great conceit. There is no desire to share with others their knowledge, but there is a desire only to assert themselves at the expense of others. A truly good developer is engaged in mentoring and training others because of the natural need for it, and does so with respect.
Reducing the importance of developers. It is also practiced later in order to form a wrong idea about themselves and the market as a whole. The less a programmer knows about how much it actually costs, the longer he will stay in one place. The less he learns, the more he lags behind the market, and this can also be played. Like, who needs you there such. The very toxic environment will give him thoughts that there is no other way, that hazing, processing and the boss is inadequate - this is the norm, that nothing is more important than the company and its interests. This is sad.

Instead of conclusion

In the courtyard - the information age, the age of IT specialists: programmers, administrators, hardware workers, and others. This is a time in which nothing is more important than brains. Leading developers are involved in global trends, create new technologies, contribute to the overall progress. To do this, they want a progressive environment, opportunities for development and self-realization. They want to learn something, share knowledge, invent; they enjoy the fact of being involved in the main technological action of modernity. They see that their knowledge, skills and experience are in high demand and highly valued in the global market. Developers are happy to bring benefits to their employers, but only on the rights of partnership, respect and mutual benefit. And those software companies that understand this are becoming known to the whole world.

Tags: