![]() I can deal with taking a pay cut, or delayed payments and so on if I know I am solvinga problem for someone, I mean a real problem, not just another enrichment opportunity.Īs it turns out, this turns out very much like your advice… people who really need to solve a problem tend to be good people/good payers and so on… but I wanted to insert a rationale that supervenes on the rationale you gave… it’s not like I am disagreeing with you, it’s just it doesn’t always infer what you seem to imply in my opinion. That in itself cuts out maybe 90% of work related stress for me. If the project is creatinga new problem… like accumulation of private capital and enriching folk that don’t deserve further enrichment then I’ll decline. If the project is about solving a problem then I’ll then take a look at the factors we both agree are important. What is it? It’s not a quantitative thing… it can’t be measured… I maybe get three calls a day asking me if I’d be interested in such and such project. ![]() Like you said, ‘Paying well and paying on time are just more parts of treating someone well’, the problem is if you are seeing working relationships as merely the sum of a number of dicrete, objectively measurable parts, something real important evades that analysis. There are good companies doing good work with good people who pay on time and pay well that are still screwing everyone, and our planet over and over because that’s exactly how they get their social license to operate, by appearing benign along a range of objective factors. The best information I ever received was shockingly painless and totally intuitive: Look at the whole, don’t let low or late pay compromise your work relationships. It amazes me that programmers are dead-set against doing things that the business world regards as common sense. This is specially true in software, where we have to deal with bug reports, features suggested by others, or maybe modifying the software to cater to the special needs of some users.Įvery user that does not contribute to your bottom line, is not only doing you a disservice, but also harming other users because every hour spent helping them is an hour you didn’t spend on the others. If a user cannot respect your work, then you are better off without that user.Įvery customer has an associated cost for a business, in terms of support, sales, etc. This resonated a lot with the idea that you should just ignore free, cheap, and whiny mass customers and focus on those who actually care and pay accordingly. ![]() So Michelin started charging for the guidebooks, just to kind convince people to actually take them seriously. Basically, people don’t respect that which has no cost. They concluded that the fact that the guidebooks were free meant people didn’t care about them. They achieved their goal, but later realized that people didn’t take the guidebooks seriously. If I recall correctly, when the Michelin company started producing guidebooks to cool places to visit in order to encourage people to go there, thereby consuming their tires faster, thereby increasing consumption of tires the guidebooks were originally given away for free in the hopes of gaining mass adoption.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |