tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3554166144204741789.post1715851078175682798..comments2023-12-31T02:16:32.747-08:00Comments on 1-800-MAGIC: On unpaid overtime...Sergey Solyanikhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03811112928687191837noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3554166144204741789.post-82053537014498954272007-12-10T16:17:00.000-08:002007-12-10T16:17:00.000-08:00Yes, but the team does not have to be internally c...Yes, but the team does not have to be internally competitive for the difference in work patterns to exist. Right?<BR/><BR/>For example, one person might choose career over a family (I am not advocating any specific choice here, just pointing them out), another might choose family over career. The first person will have higher probability to be more productive, because (s)he invests a lot more time into work.<BR/><BR/>If a person is more productive than the average, (s)he should be compensated above the average, right?<BR/><BR/>Nothing above says that the environment is not collaborative...Sergey Solyanikhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03811112928687191837noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3554166144204741789.post-34667024342664252752007-12-10T10:19:00.000-08:002007-12-10T10:19:00.000-08:00On a second thought, I would also argue against yo...On a second thought, I would also argue against your second point in voluntary overtime too. It may be voluntary, but internal competiveness of the team is rather a hallmark fo poor management than anything else.<BR/><BR/>It boils down to the question: do you want your team be competitive or collaborative? Do you want those who are 100 times more efficient to train those who are slow, or do you want them to sabotage those who are only 50 times more efficient?Eldarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15861918457793608316noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3554166144204741789.post-16720411331512982062007-12-09T20:01:00.000-08:002007-12-09T20:01:00.000-08:00Well, I would not call it "an argumnent". I agree ...Well, I would not call it "an argumnent". I agree with most of your points and I was actually talking about a different thing. <BR/><BR/>If anything, I only could argue about a few minor points in your position, but not the whole thing.<BR/><BR/>Those minor point are:<BR/><BR/>1. Microsoft is not an island of high salaries. The whole industry is of this kind. And I would not call it insane -- market is usually very sane thing where you pay as little as you could for as much as you can get.<BR/><BR/>2. About an incentive to have only top 10%, you forget that Microsoft is supposedly targets top 5%. So your 10% withn MS is actually top 0.5% of worldwide talent. Not a big surprise, that it's tough.<BR/><BR/>3. While being a PM, I observed on many occasions the determination of who is top 10% and who is bottom 10% screwed up. I've seen excellent developers driven off the teams for mere office politics, and those who driven them out gaining the glory and becoming leads, managers and pain in the ... for the whole team. When we'll meet next time, I can give you the names.Eldarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15861918457793608316noreply@blogger.com