The life of a simple programmer is hard and plain
I admit right away - the title of the article is just such in the name of rhyme, in fact, we will talk about modern pioneers in IT - beginning developers, analysts, testers, all those who are called Junior.
I suggest discussing how in our time it is best to start a career, what paths there are at the start, where to go to a student, or even a student who knows PHP, JS, Go, PostgreSQL, I heard something about QA and, it seems, understands why code review exists.
Recently, as part of the discussion of an article on Habré, a rather curious discussion took place, one of the main thoughts of which I formulated for myself as follows: should a commercial company hire, train and educate Junees?
We’ll immediately deal with the terms: under “should” in this particular case, I mean both the social function of the type “if not to hire, then who else will teach them?” And the economic type of “to hire them is profitable, since they are cheap”.
As part of this article, I call “Junami” both novice developers, and novice engineers, testers, consultants, and even novice managers. In general, a full stack of development and operations, plus management, and all this is natural in IT.
The term "beginner" means a person who, on a theoretical level, has a certain competence, but did not apply it in practice, or did it on personal and / or small projects, that is, he did not work for the customer, he has little idea what team work is, what processes exist in a typical organization, etc.
Here and below, I’m not talking about the “stars”, those students who are already starting to hunt for them from the third year’s bench of the institute, these guys have their own very interesting and sometimes difficult fate. Also, the material of the article is geographically limited by the Russian Federation; in any other country, most likely a different situation should be considered separately.
When we begin to talk about the social obligations of a commercial company in relation to someone in a market economy, we can immediately put an end to this, since a market economy does not imply government regulation in terms of social obligations.
Let me repeat this postulate: a commercial company in the capitalist world and highly competitive environment should not bear any social obligations. Maybe if she wants to, but the imposition of such an obligation on the organization, the purpose of which is to maximize profits, immediately transfers it to the conditions of the social-liberal economy, where the state indicates (forces) all commercial entities exactly how they should manage the earned capital.
A tax burden, which in our country in some cases reaches 70-80% of the profit, the minimum wage requiring you to pay at least X, a labor code with a limit of forty hours, the impossibility of exploiting child labor (which is an unconditional benefit, however ), the prohibition of the impossibility of this, all this puts the commercial company in a situation where you have to save on everything for survival. Or apply different types of schemes, both in relations with the state and its affiliates (everyone who falls under both 44FZ and 223FZ), and other market participants - competing companies, suppliers and consumers (remember about a 0.9 liter milk package , or a dozen eggs in which there are nine).
Our state has not yet reached the realization of ideas when the obligation of any commercial company will begin to include the hiring of a certain number of disabled people, fathers and mothers of large families, rehabilitated prisoners, the unemployedand other poor . But if (when) this happens, the existence of private business in our country will be under a very big question.
So, I summarize: a commercial organization should not bear any social obligations in relation to the Joons. Maybe if he wants, if there is a completely understandable budget for this, which the management is ready to merge at a loss.
And who should bear social obligations towards the Joonsand other poor ?
Of course, our beloved state. I personally know what a shortage of IT specialists in government agencies. I know how interesting the problems are being solved there. I know that it is there that you can develop the necessary competency to the heights when the junior will be ready to take not only some integrator there, but also Google and the apple combined. Yes, they will have to work a lot, sometimes very much, simply because there is a field that is not plowed for work and there is no one to plow it, or “not willing”, but this is good, it is in these conditions that you can gain a huge amount of knowledge in a very short period of time and experience. Yes, there you have to wade through bureaucracy and dozens or hundreds of unnecessary meetings, but that’s how “the steel is tempered” and an employee with a very obvious set of soft skills (the ability to painlessly pass through arrays of documents
Therefore, June, if you read up to this place, try in any administration of the FIU, Federal Tax Service, Ministry of Internal Affairs, FC and other government agencies, including hospitals and some PAOs - they are waiting for you with open arms. Work there for a couple of years maximum, and if you do not grow up to the middle, there, then almost any "businessman" will take you with great pleasure, because you will pass the crucible. Of course, if you will work, and not engage in IDB, because in almost any "state" you can not work.
It is important here: in any state organization you will have to include discipline and self-motivation in order to really do business, but having developed these qualities in yourself you will become a truly valuable specialist. After some time, when you get used to it, you will surely find people who also work, do real benefits, and do not pretend, that is with them and keep the closest contact, these are almost holy people.
Be careful, do not become a saint yourself, a year or two and conduct an audit of yourself, write on a sheet of paper in two columns “as it was” / “as it became”, be surprised and go to HH.
The purpose of a commercial company is to profit from the services provided, or to sell manufactured products. Profit is at the forefront. If there is disagreement with this statement, then give your definition in the comments, but for now, I and the wiki live with him.
Here, in the framework of this maxim, I propose to consider the question - is it profitable for the company to hire a junior, or not.
Profit, as you know from the school course of economics, is equal to income minus costs.
And it’s better to expand this classic formula on the other hand:
(Production costs) + (Margin) + (Risks) = (Price of goods / services)
“That's what guys ... I won’t give you a machine gun ...”
The easiest way to calculate the economic feasibility of hiring a junior in a small commercial company operating in the IT market is to try to figure out how production costs will change, which, for simplification, I will call the cost price.
There are dozens of models for calculating the cost of production of goods or the provision of services; within the framework of the case under consideration, I will take the simplest one: we take the wage fund for employees of production units and multiply by the K-coefficient.
K-coefficient is the value accumulating in itself all other expenses that the company incurs in its production cycle, with the exception of the wage fund of employees of production units.
(K-coefficient) = (salary of employees of supporting departments) + (taxes of all kinds) + (equipment / jobs / other means of production) + (utility / telematics / other periodic payments)
(I am familiar with many models for calculating the cost of production of goods, from RSVD to TD ABC through cost driven rates, but in the most efficient way to calculate the degree of influence of a management decision on the cost of goods / services, personally I think it’s the calculation of its influence on the K-coefficient)
Introductory:
So, is it possible to calculate how much one employee costs with a net salary of 100 rubles for the company that he hired? how much is this same K-coefficient, with which we can understand the cost of 1 producing unit?
If they were to exclude the NSR and “simplified” options, to calculate the cost of 1 production unit, the salary of each employee producing the product, or directly providing services (the so-called “producer”), we multiply by the K-factor = 2.2.
Personally, I deduced the value of 2.2 with blood and sweat, each of the owners calculates it himself, specifically for his own conditions and costs, and never in my life have I met a single commercial company that would have it below the indicated 1.9, most organizations in which I saw the BDR this indicator is between 2.3 and 2.5, but for further calculations, for a more optimistic picture, I suggest taking a coefficient of 2.0.
This means that a “production worker” with a salary of 100 rubles costs the company 200 rubles a month, regardless of whether he has done any good or not.
Important: for the company to "go to zero", the sales manager must sell each of the working hours of the "producer" with a salary of 100 rubles for 200 rubles. One hour of work of the “producer” can be transformed both into the sale of the “box” created by the company, and the provision of services to external contractors - outsourcing, outstaff, service.
I completely forgot about the clock! This is interesting and also important.
What do you think, how many hours should an employee work on a period? Or is it better to ask like this - what percentage of useful recycling should a “production worker" have?
It is generally accepted, and the labor code directly says this, that the maximum working time should be limited to 40 hours a week. Or eight hours a day.
Imagine a situation, here an employee comes to work at nine in the morning, turns on the computer at 9:01, and starts working completely. Without being distracted by instant messengers, coffee, talking with colleagues, reading the Internet, that's just doing work. At 13:00 he gets up and goes for lunch. At 14:00 he sits down at the computer again and code-design-tests exactly until 18:00. At 18:01, with a sense of accomplishment, he goes to his wife and children, well, or to the strawberry. And so 11 months a year. He does not get sick, does not study, does not communicate during non-working hours during working hours. Only in this case can we say that the employee works with 100% recycling. But it costs a couple of times a year to get sick for a week and recycling drops to 95%.
In fact, we certainly don’t care like that, we drink coffee, we communicate with colleagues on abstract topics, we do not, no, during the working day, but we’re watching Habr and Picabu. OK, I won’t torment, and I’ll say right away that an employee of the production unit in IT has an average recycling rate of 80% per period. Achieving 90% recycling over a period is 10 hours a day. Achievement of 120% utilization in the period is 12-14 hours a day, seven days a week.
So, each employee of production units, in accordance with the disposal = 80%, benefits the company from 120 to 130 hours a month, or from 30 to 32 hours a week, or about 6 hours every working day.
Only six hours a day do the analyst write the statement of work, only six hours do the developer implement it in code, only six hours do the tester check it.
A couple of important nuances, precisely for this case: the first - none of the “production workers” learns anything new and does not teach anyone else, each of them is self-sufficient and figurative for the benefit of the case for six hours at least every working day; and secondly, our production model is structured in such a way that there is always work for each of the manufacturers, they are not idle due to the lack of tasks (which is quite common in reality, but we are now discussing a spherical company).
And let's calculate the "cost" of one hour of a specific "producer" based on his salary of 100 rubles:
100r / 120h * (K) 2 = 1.6 rubles per 1 hour of work
(for the company to go to zero - 1 hour of work of the “producer” with a salary of 100K must be sold in the form of a service or a “box” for 1600 rubles; it is impossible to cheaper - there will be a loss)
Patience, we get to the point. Although, I think, by this moment the majority already understands the size of the disaster ...
Ta-dam! We take a junior, in the stack we need, this is a diligent guy, but so far he knows a little, experience is also not enough, but he is a darling, we want to grow a great middle from him, and maybe even a signora. Our new colleague wants 50 rubles a month.
Thus, June costs the company, taking into account taxes, a workplace and other things (K-coefficient = 2), already at 100 rubles. Let's take the standard three months into our horizon, and tell the June that either in three months he will start figuring along with everyone, or "the door is open, go away please."
I’m ready to listen to all the indignation due to me in the comments, but in some places I have to take numbers from the ceiling, I won’t be able to demonstrate otherwise.
The math is as follows:
We consider what the cost of the company employed in June:
300 +60 + 64 = 424 rubles; plus due to the distraction of the team to training, the cost of an hour of the N-number of “production workers” increased by at least 10%.
On this, I think, we can summarize: the company in the first three months incurs a direct loss of 424 rubles and even if insignificantly, it increases the “cost price” of the hour of “production workers”.
We all don’t know whether our middle June will turn out to be a good middle or not. But now the owner of the company must make a decision - he is ready to throw 424 rubles into an event, the success of which no one can guarantee him, and even no one in his right mind can take it into account.
Or is it better for the owner to immediately hire a middle for 100 rubles, which immediately (well, in a week) will start to bring benefits?
To summarize: in a capitalist system and a market economy, the state cannot (and should not) impose social obligations on a commercial company to hire juniors, students and other categories of citizens who are poorly protected at the start of a career; the calculations I have given, even for a “spherical company in a vacuum,” clearly prove the economic inexpediency of hiring jones.
How to be?
I already wrote a few words about the first path - to go to work for the state. Despite all the disadvantages of this approach, including not very high salaries, there you can get very valuable experience and develop both hard and soft skills.
The second way is to try to get into the giants of the industry, both domestic, such as Yandex and Mail, and imported, of those who remained in our market - Microsoft, Google and Dell, etc. ... It's hard even for an experienced specialist (interview cycle at the end it took me six months), but it’s possible. The giants have a completely different economy, it is weakly associated with the performance of each unit, they rarely consider the cost driven rate, therefore, once you get there, you can work there even until retirement.
The third way is startups. Everything is obvious here - just at the start of work, the low cost (well, zero, only on the idea and motivation) of the production unit is very important, and the experience can be enormous, but very fleeting. It seems that only 0.1% of startups survive one year of life, and the rest ... hm.
What I want to say at the end - you should not go to work at the start of the company "by acquaintance". All my experience screams that both sides regret this in most cases (it’s not worth getting on a “pull” at the start, in the future career it can become almost the main ways of career growth)
Regardless of the “from” I want to wish every june success at the start of his career “go, braz, go! you can do it! ”
I suggest discussing how in our time it is best to start a career, what paths there are at the start, where to go to a student, or even a student who knows PHP, JS, Go, PostgreSQL, I heard something about QA and, it seems, understands why code review exists.
Recently, as part of the discussion of an article on Habré, a rather curious discussion took place, one of the main thoughts of which I formulated for myself as follows: should a commercial company hire, train and educate Junees?
We’ll immediately deal with the terms: under “should” in this particular case, I mean both the social function of the type “if not to hire, then who else will teach them?” And the economic type of “to hire them is profitable, since they are cheap”.
As part of this article, I call “Junami” both novice developers, and novice engineers, testers, consultants, and even novice managers. In general, a full stack of development and operations, plus management, and all this is natural in IT.
The term "beginner" means a person who, on a theoretical level, has a certain competence, but did not apply it in practice, or did it on personal and / or small projects, that is, he did not work for the customer, he has little idea what team work is, what processes exist in a typical organization, etc.
Here and below, I’m not talking about the “stars”, those students who are already starting to hunt for them from the third year’s bench of the institute, these guys have their own very interesting and sometimes difficult fate. Also, the material of the article is geographically limited by the Russian Federation; in any other country, most likely a different situation should be considered separately.
Social function
When we begin to talk about the social obligations of a commercial company in relation to someone in a market economy, we can immediately put an end to this, since a market economy does not imply government regulation in terms of social obligations.
Let me repeat this postulate: a commercial company in the capitalist world and highly competitive environment should not bear any social obligations. Maybe if she wants to, but the imposition of such an obligation on the organization, the purpose of which is to maximize profits, immediately transfers it to the conditions of the social-liberal economy, where the state indicates (forces) all commercial entities exactly how they should manage the earned capital.
A tax burden, which in our country in some cases reaches 70-80% of the profit, the minimum wage requiring you to pay at least X, a labor code with a limit of forty hours, the impossibility of exploiting child labor (which is an unconditional benefit, however ), the prohibition of the impossibility of this, all this puts the commercial company in a situation where you have to save on everything for survival. Or apply different types of schemes, both in relations with the state and its affiliates (everyone who falls under both 44FZ and 223FZ), and other market participants - competing companies, suppliers and consumers (remember about a 0.9 liter milk package , or a dozen eggs in which there are nine).
Our state has not yet reached the realization of ideas when the obligation of any commercial company will begin to include the hiring of a certain number of disabled people, fathers and mothers of large families, rehabilitated prisoners, the unemployed
And what about this in the west?
At the end of the 2000s, I worked in the Russian branch of one of the world's largest IT companies. Once, a request came from corporate headquarters to the corporate mail, in which we asked in a reply letter to write how many gay people work in our hub.
It may be customary in the USA when asking for a job to ask how straight you are, or in what other way they conduct polls, but in the Russian Federation this topic is not so much tabooed, but like that, go straight to a colleague and ask “hear, but you're not a pederast by chance? ”it is absolutely certain to receive a response in the face, and most likely more than once, and possibly not only by hand. The hub’s leadership scratched his head for a while, and then answered “None, zero, zero” and calmly went on to draw P&L for the next quarter. But it was not there.
In the next letter, the head office demanded that the hub have the minimum required number of employees blue, pink, and what colors are there in this rainbow. There was no laughing matter, where to get them? How to identify? Can I post a hiring advertisement? They laughed for a long time over the idea of appointing: “Elena Petrovna, there is such a thing, I appoint you our corporate lesbian, you need, just for business, you understand ...”.
Unscrew, of course, but the approach itself, which consisted in regulating the quality of employees at such a level, was not expected.
It may be customary in the USA when asking for a job to ask how straight you are, or in what other way they conduct polls, but in the Russian Federation this topic is not so much tabooed, but like that, go straight to a colleague and ask “hear, but you're not a pederast by chance? ”it is absolutely certain to receive a response in the face, and most likely more than once, and possibly not only by hand. The hub’s leadership scratched his head for a while, and then answered “None, zero, zero” and calmly went on to draw P&L for the next quarter. But it was not there.
In the next letter, the head office demanded that the hub have the minimum required number of employees blue, pink, and what colors are there in this rainbow. There was no laughing matter, where to get them? How to identify? Can I post a hiring advertisement? They laughed for a long time over the idea of appointing: “Elena Petrovna, there is such a thing, I appoint you our corporate lesbian, you need, just for business, you understand ...”.
Unscrew, of course, but the approach itself, which consisted in regulating the quality of employees at such a level, was not expected.
So, I summarize: a commercial organization should not bear any social obligations in relation to the Joons. Maybe if he wants, if there is a completely understandable budget for this, which the management is ready to merge at a loss.
And who should bear social obligations towards the Joons
Of course, our beloved state. I personally know what a shortage of IT specialists in government agencies. I know how interesting the problems are being solved there. I know that it is there that you can develop the necessary competency to the heights when the junior will be ready to take not only some integrator there, but also Google and the apple combined. Yes, they will have to work a lot, sometimes very much, simply because there is a field that is not plowed for work and there is no one to plow it, or “not willing”, but this is good, it is in these conditions that you can gain a huge amount of knowledge in a very short period of time and experience. Yes, there you have to wade through bureaucracy and dozens or hundreds of unnecessary meetings, but that’s how “the steel is tempered” and an employee with a very obvious set of soft skills (the ability to painlessly pass through arrays of documents
Therefore, June, if you read up to this place, try in any administration of the FIU, Federal Tax Service, Ministry of Internal Affairs, FC and other government agencies, including hospitals and some PAOs - they are waiting for you with open arms. Work there for a couple of years maximum, and if you do not grow up to the middle, there, then almost any "businessman" will take you with great pleasure, because you will pass the crucible. Of course, if you will work, and not engage in IDB, because in almost any "state" you can not work.
It is important here: in any state organization you will have to include discipline and self-motivation in order to really do business, but having developed these qualities in yourself you will become a truly valuable specialist. After some time, when you get used to it, you will surely find people who also work, do real benefits, and do not pretend, that is with them and keep the closest contact, these are almost holy people.
Be careful, do not become a saint yourself, a year or two and conduct an audit of yourself, write on a sheet of paper in two columns “as it was” / “as it became”, be surprised and go to HH.
Economic expediency
The purpose of a commercial company is to profit from the services provided, or to sell manufactured products. Profit is at the forefront. If there is disagreement with this statement, then give your definition in the comments, but for now, I and the wiki live with him.
Here, in the framework of this maxim, I propose to consider the question - is it profitable for the company to hire a junior, or not.
Profit, as you know from the school course of economics, is equal to income minus costs.
And it’s better to expand this classic formula on the other hand:
(Production costs) + (Margin) + (Risks) = (Price of goods / services)
“That's what guys ... I won’t give you a machine gun ...”
The easiest way to calculate the economic feasibility of hiring a junior in a small commercial company operating in the IT market is to try to figure out how production costs will change, which, for simplification, I will call the cost price.
There are dozens of models for calculating the cost of production of goods or the provision of services; within the framework of the case under consideration, I will take the simplest one: we take the wage fund for employees of production units and multiply by the K-coefficient.
K-coefficient is the value accumulating in itself all other expenses that the company incurs in its production cycle, with the exception of the wage fund of employees of production units.
(K-coefficient) = (salary of employees of supporting departments) + (taxes of all kinds) + (equipment / jobs / other means of production) + (utility / telematics / other periodic payments)
(I am familiar with many models for calculating the cost of production of goods, from RSVD to TD ABC through cost driven rates, but in the most efficient way to calculate the degree of influence of a management decision on the cost of goods / services, personally I think it’s the calculation of its influence on the K-coefficient)
So, lower the level of abstraction and describe a spherical horse
Take a company that develops software, both to order and boxed solutions. The company has an established team of architects, team leaders, analysts, developers, sub-specialists, testers and engineers. For each of them, there is an obvious and expressed in numbers index of role performance (based primarily on statistical data from the history of the work of a particular role; nevertheless, it is regularly adjusted, since there are few similar tasks). We use the performance index to calculate the time required to implement a particular task.
Sales and presale managers are running around somewhere, but developers usually don’t see them; in their offices, having covered with booklets, marketers are piling over SMM reports, mass media entertainers from the personnel service are wool headhunters and at the same time preparing the upcoming corporate event.
With all these employees, it’s much more complicated in terms of calculating their productivity: the commercial unit certainly draws a sales funnel for a certain event horizon, but when asked what will come of it and with what probability, they roll their eyes to the ceiling and mutter something like “ All the will of Allah. " The staff is in the same trouble: when asked “what the hell did you send me twenty CVs of si-plus-men, if I asked si-sharpovtsev” they can answer with a blue eye “what’s wrong with the letter si there and there.” I don’t want to write anything about marketers, these devils have some kind of mathematics of their own, and maybe even physics, and it’s impossible to understand the effectiveness of their work without half a liter for a brother. Sometimes, the company still has lawyers and accountants, these creatures are certainly useful, but they are needed from time to time, and if the company is small,
Finally, over the whole gang, leadership sits on top. Commercial, Executive, Technical - Directors. Well, the general, where without him, he signs the documents.
Suppose that all together and individually these are sane people, appointees and “thieves” neither among the production, nor the supporting, nor the management personnel — no (fiction, of course, I mean that all are sane, but let there be such a sphericalhorse in vacuum company).
Based on the Rosencrantz formula, I will derive the ratio of production personnel to all other types of employees (providing, administrative personnel, sales people, etc.) specifically in IT, as 7 to 1, that is, for every seven employees of production units there is onefreeloader employee not directly involved in the development of a product or service.
Thus, in a company of 100 people for 85 "developers" you need 15 "prosperity" (rounded of course).
Sales and presale managers are running around somewhere, but developers usually don’t see them; in their offices, having covered with booklets, marketers are piling over SMM reports, mass media entertainers from the personnel service are wool headhunters and at the same time preparing the upcoming corporate event.
With all these employees, it’s much more complicated in terms of calculating their productivity: the commercial unit certainly draws a sales funnel for a certain event horizon, but when asked what will come of it and with what probability, they roll their eyes to the ceiling and mutter something like “ All the will of Allah. " The staff is in the same trouble: when asked “what the hell did you send me twenty CVs of si-plus-men, if I asked si-sharpovtsev” they can answer with a blue eye “what’s wrong with the letter si there and there.” I don’t want to write anything about marketers, these devils have some kind of mathematics of their own, and maybe even physics, and it’s impossible to understand the effectiveness of their work without half a liter for a brother. Sometimes, the company still has lawyers and accountants, these creatures are certainly useful, but they are needed from time to time, and if the company is small,
Finally, over the whole gang, leadership sits on top. Commercial, Executive, Technical - Directors. Well, the general, where without him, he signs the documents.
Suppose that all together and individually these are sane people, appointees and “thieves” neither among the production, nor the supporting, nor the management personnel — no (fiction, of course, I mean that all are sane, but let there be such a spherical
Based on the Rosencrantz formula, I will derive the ratio of production personnel to all other types of employees (providing, administrative personnel, sales people, etc.) specifically in IT, as 7 to 1, that is, for every seven employees of production units there is one
Thus, in a company of 100 people for 85 "developers" you need 15 "prosperity" (rounded of course).
Introductory:
- each employee of the company receives a salary;
- for each of the employees, the company pays taxes to the state, at least 30% of each's salary;
- all employees are sitting in the office, to simplify, let's decide that it belongs to the owner of the company, which means that he pays 2% of the tax on its estimated value; plus the owner pays for electricity, water, sewage, telephony, Internet, fire and other labor protection; from time to time, the owner takes out garbage, cleans snow, repairs premises and buildings; (a model with its own building is cheaper than renting, but when renting the company is deprived of some domestic problems, since all this water-electricity-snow is included in the rental price; nevertheless, for our calculations we take a cheaper option with its own building);
- each of the employees has a workplace equipped with a table, chair, computer, telephone, somewhere in the corridor the printer is buzzing, there are servers in the racks behind the wall, the diesel engine missing in the courtyard, all this stuff is used every day, which means it is amortized, aging, requires repair and replacement almost every five years;
- finally, with each box of software sold, or every hour of services provided and paid for by an external client, the company pays income tax in the amount of 20% of that same profit;
So, is it possible to calculate how much one employee costs with a net salary of 100 rubles for the company that he hired? how much is this same K-coefficient, with which we can understand the cost of 1 producing unit?
If they were to exclude the NSR and “simplified” options, to calculate the cost of 1 production unit, the salary of each employee producing the product, or directly providing services (the so-called “producer”), we multiply by the K-factor = 2.2.
Personally, I deduced the value of 2.2 with blood and sweat, each of the owners calculates it himself, specifically for his own conditions and costs, and never in my life have I met a single commercial company that would have it below the indicated 1.9, most organizations in which I saw the BDR this indicator is between 2.3 and 2.5, but for further calculations, for a more optimistic picture, I suggest taking a coefficient of 2.0.
This means that a “production worker” with a salary of 100 rubles costs the company 200 rubles a month, regardless of whether he has done any good or not.
Important: for the company to "go to zero", the sales manager must sell each of the working hours of the "producer" with a salary of 100 rubles for 200 rubles. One hour of work of the “producer” can be transformed both into the sale of the “box” created by the company, and the provision of services to external contractors - outsourcing, outstaff, service.
I completely forgot about the clock! This is interesting and also important.
What do you think, how many hours should an employee work on a period? Or is it better to ask like this - what percentage of useful recycling should a “production worker" have?
It is generally accepted, and the labor code directly says this, that the maximum working time should be limited to 40 hours a week. Or eight hours a day.
Imagine a situation, here an employee comes to work at nine in the morning, turns on the computer at 9:01, and starts working completely. Without being distracted by instant messengers, coffee, talking with colleagues, reading the Internet, that's just doing work. At 13:00 he gets up and goes for lunch. At 14:00 he sits down at the computer again and code-design-tests exactly until 18:00. At 18:01, with a sense of accomplishment, he goes to his wife and children, well, or to the strawberry. And so 11 months a year. He does not get sick, does not study, does not communicate during non-working hours during working hours. Only in this case can we say that the employee works with 100% recycling. But it costs a couple of times a year to get sick for a week and recycling drops to 95%.
In fact, we certainly don’t care like that, we drink coffee, we communicate with colleagues on abstract topics, we do not, no, during the working day, but we’re watching Habr and Picabu. OK, I won’t torment, and I’ll say right away that an employee of the production unit in IT has an average recycling rate of 80% per period. Achieving 90% recycling over a period is 10 hours a day. Achievement of 120% utilization in the period is 12-14 hours a day, seven days a week.
How about in the west?
In the same company, the IT giant of world capitalism, where I worked at the end of the 2000s, the following pay scheme was adopted: in order to get the income fixed in the offer, an employee of the production unit had to enter into the accounting system:
Or, if in absolute numbers, a total of 128 hours were entered into the accounting system, of which:
Considering that none of the employees was forced to go to the office (moreover, they were regularly asked NOT to come to the office if there are no meetings, or if there is no need for a projector, conference calls, etc.) and each of the employees in terms of alignment the schedule of his work was his own boss (to a certain extent, they focused both on the needs of customers and the need for remote work with headquarters in the USA, on the need for online and onsite audits - from code-review to a direct survey of customers with their degree of satisfaction sti), the accurate clock entering into the accounting system became self-granted occupation, which directly depended on income (there still was a smart bonus scheme, but more on that another time).
For managers, there were other% of utilization, namely, for RP - 40% billable hours, 15% listening to trainings, 10% conducting trainings (there was no RP in its pure form, in this case I am analogous to RP); and so for everyone, from the resource manager to the head of the branch.
- 60% of the hours on the period paid by live money of external customers;
- 10% of the hours during the period spent on continuing education (recorded through online and onsite training visits);
- and 10% of the hours for mentoring (development and conduct of online and onsite trainings;
Or, if in absolute numbers, a total of 128 hours were entered into the accounting system, of which:
- 96 hours paid by the customer;
- 16 hours to listen to trainings;
- 16 hours to prepare and conduct trainings;
Considering that none of the employees was forced to go to the office (moreover, they were regularly asked NOT to come to the office if there are no meetings, or if there is no need for a projector, conference calls, etc.) and each of the employees in terms of alignment the schedule of his work was his own boss (to a certain extent, they focused both on the needs of customers and the need for remote work with headquarters in the USA, on the need for online and onsite audits - from code-review to a direct survey of customers with their degree of satisfaction sti), the accurate clock entering into the accounting system became self-granted occupation, which directly depended on income (there still was a smart bonus scheme, but more on that another time).
For managers, there were other% of utilization, namely, for RP - 40% billable hours, 15% listening to trainings, 10% conducting trainings (there was no RP in its pure form, in this case I am analogous to RP); and so for everyone, from the resource manager to the head of the branch.
So, each employee of production units, in accordance with the disposal = 80%, benefits the company from 120 to 130 hours a month, or from 30 to 32 hours a week, or about 6 hours every working day.
Only six hours a day do the analyst write the statement of work, only six hours do the developer implement it in code, only six hours do the tester check it.
A couple of important nuances, precisely for this case: the first - none of the “production workers” learns anything new and does not teach anyone else, each of them is self-sufficient and figurative for the benefit of the case for six hours at least every working day; and secondly, our production model is structured in such a way that there is always work for each of the manufacturers, they are not idle due to the lack of tasks (which is quite common in reality, but we are now discussing a spherical company).
And let's calculate the "cost" of one hour of a specific "producer" based on his salary of 100 rubles:
100r / 120h * (K) 2 = 1.6 rubles per 1 hour of work
(for the company to go to zero - 1 hour of work of the “producer” with a salary of 100K must be sold in the form of a service or a “box” for 1600 rubles; it is impossible to cheaper - there will be a loss)
Patience, we get to the point. Although, I think, by this moment the majority already understands the size of the disaster ...
Ta-dam! We take a junior, in the stack we need, this is a diligent guy, but so far he knows a little, experience is also not enough, but he is a darling, we want to grow a great middle from him, and maybe even a signora. Our new colleague wants 50 rubles a month.
Thus, June costs the company, taking into account taxes, a workplace and other things (K-coefficient = 2), already at 100 rubles. Let's take the standard three months into our horizon, and tell the June that either in three months he will start figuring along with everyone, or "the door is open, go away please."
I’m ready to listen to all the indignation due to me in the comments, but in some places I have to take numbers from the ceiling, I won’t be able to demonstrate otherwise.
The math is as follows:
- We will pay 300 rubles for 3 months of June’s work (salary, workplace, prosperity, taxes, etc.) and this is a net loss;
- 24 hours for 3 months (2 hours a week, or 25 minutes every day) will spend on training and monitoring the results of a team lead with a salary of 150 rubles, which will cost the company 60 rubles of net loss, which in turn will increase the sales value of 1 hour team lead up to 3r / hour
- 40 “hours” in 3 months will be spent on other training by its “production workers” - the developers will learn how to comment correctly on the code, regularly arrange code reviews, merge / unmerge June codes, everyone who can point out errors, testers will find crookedness in June prototypes , the June will torment himself with questions - that’s precisely the task he was given and he carefully fulfills it; To be honest, I took 40 hours of total labor from the ceiling, I know that this is much more substantial labor; 40 hours of total costs from “production workers” with the same salary of 100 rubles will cost companies 64 rubles, and increase the sale value of each of them from 1.6 rubles per hour to (umm ... but in my model their number is unknown, well, ok) to 1, 8r / hour
We consider what the cost of the company employed in June:
300 +60 + 64 = 424 rubles; plus due to the distraction of the team to training, the cost of an hour of the N-number of “production workers” increased by at least 10%.
On this, I think, we can summarize: the company in the first three months incurs a direct loss of 424 rubles and even if insignificantly, it increases the “cost price” of the hour of “production workers”.
We all don’t know whether our middle June will turn out to be a good middle or not. But now the owner of the company must make a decision - he is ready to throw 424 rubles into an event, the success of which no one can guarantee him, and even no one in his right mind can take it into account.
Or is it better for the owner to immediately hire a middle for 100 rubles, which immediately (well, in a week) will start to bring benefits?
How to survive in such an economy?
Personally, we have a K-factor = 2.8 when calculating work for commercial customers. And at the bidding ready to fall to 2.7. But when we go to help the state on the public procurement website, the coefficient is rarely lower than 3.4 - 3.5, as our state is used to bending the commercial sector in everything, and apparently it is impossible to do otherwise.
conclusions
To summarize: in a capitalist system and a market economy, the state cannot (and should not) impose social obligations on a commercial company to hire juniors, students and other categories of citizens who are poorly protected at the start of a career; the calculations I have given, even for a “spherical company in a vacuum,” clearly prove the economic inexpediency of hiring jones.
How to be?
I already wrote a few words about the first path - to go to work for the state. Despite all the disadvantages of this approach, including not very high salaries, there you can get very valuable experience and develop both hard and soft skills.
The second way is to try to get into the giants of the industry, both domestic, such as Yandex and Mail, and imported, of those who remained in our market - Microsoft, Google and Dell, etc. ... It's hard even for an experienced specialist (interview cycle at the end it took me six months), but it’s possible. The giants have a completely different economy, it is weakly associated with the performance of each unit, they rarely consider the cost driven rate, therefore, once you get there, you can work there even until retirement.
The third way is startups. Everything is obvious here - just at the start of work, the low cost (well, zero, only on the idea and motivation) of the production unit is very important, and the experience can be enormous, but very fleeting. It seems that only 0.1% of startups survive one year of life, and the rest ... hm.
What I want to say at the end - you should not go to work at the start of the company "by acquaintance". All my experience screams that both sides regret this in most cases (it’s not worth getting on a “pull” at the start, in the future career it can become almost the main ways of career growth)
Regardless of the “from” I want to wish every june success at the start of his career “go, braz, go! you can do it! ”
Grunts of Obligation
Some citizens of our country still believe that everyone around them owes. For example, the state must promptly repair roads and treat fools, wipers instantly remove snow and dirt from the streets, doctors according to the first symptom should be broken and cured into a cake, and traffic cops, in general, must be at the scene of a traffic accident ten minutes after it making and, on bent, ingratiatingly asking for details, to draw up all these pieces of paper. I pay taxes! They are there - must!
Or, a service department, for example, a cellular or Internet service provider, should do everything possible so that it is your problem that is resolved first, “fix it right now, I’m waiting because I’m paying you!”, They’re not interested in “package_yarovoy”, about excavator_Vasyu, who cut the trunk optics with his bucket, no, “hear, the operator, quickly darted and fixed everything!”
Or the boss, this one must take into account a bad tooth, bad mood, a hangover, the special position of the stars in the sky, but in general “You owe me treat as a Person! ”(I quote).
At the same time, these citizens can calmly throw an empty glass of coffee under their feet on the street, shake out an overflowing ashtray standing in a traffic jam, pass a distinguished teacher freezing in a snowdrift, and not give up a seat on the bus for an elderly surgeon. Yes, in the sentence above, I mixed hard-to-mix cases into one pile, but it just so happened that I became this eyewitness and partly participant, this winter.
Such citizens can suddenly disappear from the production reality of the company on the eve of the NDP, PSI and other very important, economically important, economically fatal stages for the company - “No, but what is it, I had to take my grandmother to the village urgently, they managed without me ? "(Quote)
My internal cognitive dissonance reached its apotheosis when I read “I litter in order to give janitors work” in one of the forums. Incomprehensible, for me personally, a twist of consciousness.
Personally, I haven’t thought for a long time that someone owes me something, and I think it’s recent to rely on a good pension, on a good medical free service, but in general - it’s better not to hope for everything “free” if you want to get quality.
In conclusion, I would like to wish everyone to have the opportunity and willpower to relate to everything that the state guarantees us at least in the same way.
Or, a service department, for example, a cellular or Internet service provider, should do everything possible so that it is your problem that is resolved first, “fix it right now, I’m waiting because I’m paying you!”, They’re not interested in “package_yarovoy”, about excavator_Vasyu, who cut the trunk optics with his bucket, no, “hear, the operator, quickly darted and fixed everything!”
Or the boss, this one must take into account a bad tooth, bad mood, a hangover, the special position of the stars in the sky, but in general “You owe me treat as a Person! ”(I quote).
At the same time, these citizens can calmly throw an empty glass of coffee under their feet on the street, shake out an overflowing ashtray standing in a traffic jam, pass a distinguished teacher freezing in a snowdrift, and not give up a seat on the bus for an elderly surgeon. Yes, in the sentence above, I mixed hard-to-mix cases into one pile, but it just so happened that I became this eyewitness and partly participant, this winter.
Such citizens can suddenly disappear from the production reality of the company on the eve of the NDP, PSI and other very important, economically important, economically fatal stages for the company - “No, but what is it, I had to take my grandmother to the village urgently, they managed without me ? "(Quote)
My internal cognitive dissonance reached its apotheosis when I read “I litter in order to give janitors work” in one of the forums. Incomprehensible, for me personally, a twist of consciousness.
Personally, I haven’t thought for a long time that someone owes me something, and I think it’s recent to rely on a good pension, on a good medical free service, but in general - it’s better not to hope for everything “free” if you want to get quality.
In conclusion, I would like to wish everyone to have the opportunity and willpower to relate to everything that the state guarantees us at least in the same way.