Compensation Fallacy| August 2008 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | 2 | |||||
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 | ||||||
Compensation FallacyIf the going rate for the average developer with skill in the technology is N, it doesn't follow that offering 2/3N will get you a developer 2/3rds as good as average. Experience and anecdotal evidence suggests to me that you're not going to hire anyone who has any ability in the technology at a rate below some floor. If that floor is 3/4N, paying 2/3N will get you no skill at all.
From a practical standpoint, as a project manager you can't expect to complete on time with a product of lesser quality with a team of underpaid developers. You can simply expect the project to fail. If you happen to be the one well-compensated developer on a team of cheap programmers? You're not going to do just a larger share of the work, you're going to do all the work. If you're unlucky, you'll get to re-do the work of the other team members as well.