[msdivy]

Found this on LinkedIn - CVs from failed startups. People are spoilt , anyway wishing them success in their job search.





Link:
1) https://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6174478171174367233

2) https://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6174541890709385216

[VeyronSuperSprt]

UBER is a classic example of IDIOTS running a business on hype rather than real cash flow.

Why?

Other than losing money faster than any other Tech companY read the headlines below:

http://m.timesofindia.com/companies/...w/53869582.cms

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/28...r-privacy.html

Uber pays 25 lakhs for a 2 year Java developer and makes a loss of $1.27 billion. Thanks to having money that isn't hard earned or a vision of sustainability.

Uber's model is original but it isn't rocket science and as happened in China will face competition and lose much of its sheen and probably even die in most countries.

But what one can learn from the likes of Uber and its ilk such as Flipkart, OLA, etc is how NOT to run a business or how to kill an industry.

At the end of the day the green horns at start ups or the ones that got rich through some VC funding on a quirky idea are the only ones that will laugh all the way to the bank.

So don't discuss your salaries here.

Discuss the sustainability of the industry when you get such high salaries and how long you think it will last. (And don't think you're getting an astronomical salary because you're smart or gods gift to mankind)

The commoditisation in the software industry makes it worse than a fish market where the HR guys are the customers, the fish is the techie and the guy selling the fish are the HR consultants.

Understanding the sustainability of your industry will do more good for you than understanding a few lines of code and will be more meaningful for your future than bargaining hard for your next months salary.

[drmohitg]

Sorry for being off-topic but I am regretting my career choices after seeing the kind of salary figures being thrown around in this thread. How I wish I could rewind and opt for a Non-medical career.

[shifu]

Originally Posted by drmohitg

Sorry for being off-topic but I am regretting my career choices after seeing the kind of salary figures being thrown around in this thread. How I wish I could rewind and opt for a Non-medical career.

Don't mind, but this is typical "Grass is greener on the other side" thinking. I am in IT and I was talking to a Air Traffic Controller (ATC) from the IAF. I was in complete awe of her job, and to my surprise she was genuinely in awe of my job in IT. I couldn't phantom why, and I still can't. Only one sentence can explain it - "Grass is greener on the other side" .

No comments on the numbers being thrown here. I can only feel jealous...

[Chetan_Rao]

While everyone thinks niche skill-sets are overpaid, most fail to recognise the potential downside.

Niche skill-sets are niche for a reason. They're usually expensive to acquire (time, effort and/or money invested), and there's always the risk of a niche technology becoming obsolete, which renders the person in need of often expensive re-skilling to become relevant again. Not to mention the highest-paid group is usually highest at-risk when corrections happen. Exceptions exist, of course.

Belonging to that group of people needs talent, perseverance and a higher risk appetite. Not everyone has all those, hence not everyone is a niche resource or paid as one.

P.S. For every person who benefits from playing the market by being at the right places at the right time, there are plenty who fall by the wayside. Sustainability is key long-term, and a lot realise that the hard way.

[RX135]

Originally Posted by drmohitg

Sorry for being off-topic but I am regretting my career choices after seeing the kind of salary figures being thrown around in this thread. How I wish I could rewind and opt for a Non-medical career.

Trust me, you haven't made wrong choice. I have been in IT long enough to assure you that.I have seen enough people drawing such astronomical salaries for a period, laid off and then waiting for months (at times more than year) to get another job, many times with significant pay cut.

What goes up quickly, goes down equally fast!

[vrprabhu]

Originally Posted by adimicra

People with 2.5 years of ex asking for 12 lacs + and 4+ years asking for 20 Lacs+

Title of the thread indicated that I best keep away, but curiosity got better of me....


Having worked 30+ years in a PSU, I guess I am not fit to contribute to this thread, but this where I stand, in comparison with IT : CTC of about Rs. 15 lakh per year.


But guess what, I have a team (10+) of professionally qualified people working under me, which includes some BE + MBAs! (And one of them has quit his job with a leading IT company to jump into finance!!) Plus, a clutch of new entrants and experienced engineers working under IT vendor..... sad thing is that the quality of freshers. I feel that many IT companies incur an indirect cost in helping these people improve their knowledge and skills, and they promptly jump ship once they see a better opportunity.


If what I am seeing here is the current situation, why do people aim for a PSU job? Job Security??

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

While everyone thinks niche skill-sets are overpaid, most fail to recognise the potential downside.

Just curious, who is saying this? I couldn't find any such reference in the last few pages.

Originally Posted by vrprabhu

If what I am seeing here is the current situation, why do people aim for a PSU job? Job Security??

That is a definite intangible, which I described in my article.

Originally Posted by reignofchaos

however if someone really wants to spend his entire life being a web developer and not move up the food chain, well I really pity him/her .

You shouldn't. Not everybody is equally ambitious. Otherwise there will be whole lot more bodies at the altar of Peter's principle.

Many are happy doing functions that doesn't require them to be on the edge all the time. That's a life choice. The security guard who opens your office gate isn't thinking about moving up the food chain, he is just thinking about putting food on the family table. Don't pity their lack of ambition.

Also, web development is not that dull either. It has become very advanced, and there is lot of demand for web designers and content writers. It is a role where one can grow and retire some day.

[adimicra]

Originally Posted by Samurai

But applicable to who?

The article is trying to answer the question "Why some companies pay high to smart people for doing mundane jobs". (WW-II)

And you are telling me that companies do have to pay very high in niche field where talent is hard. (Viet Cong)

These are two very different things. A web developer doesn't look at a guy doing core research and envy his salary. He looks at a guy doing the web development in another company while getting paid lot more.

I get your point and may be I misunderstood the intent of your post.

But, what do you mean by smart people doing mundane jobs?
Can you be give some examples of mundane job?

Smart people can even make a difference in seemingly mundane jobs and these small differences can be a differentiating factor for the organization vs its competitors. Also, as I said earlier, unless the job is really mundane where there is no scope for creative thinking or good problem solving skills, smart people will make a difference in the quality of work.I come from a product development background mainly, so I am not sure about service companies where resources seem to be treated mostly as commodities.

My current organization seem to be have suddenly realized this and trying to hire better people than the existing ones and offering higher salaries. I like this approach as long as they treat the existing people well, at least people who have been really good performers.

[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Just curious, who is saying this? I couldn't find any such reference in the last few pages.

That wasn't intended necessarily for a specific post on this thread alone. I should've said that explicitly.

While it's undeniable that overpaying is a reality in certain segments today, a lot of people tar every 'perceived' overpaid resource with the same brush, not looking at the larger picture.

Being niche-skilled may be lucrative, but it's also a risky proposition and not everyone's cup of tea. High-risk equates to potentially high rewards, isn't that how every marketplace works?

Hiring niche skill resources is sometimes an investment too, and I've seen quite a few companies corner as many as they can just so the competition can't have them. That has potential to backfire but deemed a risk worth taking if the tech in question goes mainstream.

[Vishal.R]

Looks like there is a confusion about “IT Industry” and “IT skills”.

There are so many different factors affecting salaries business model is the one of the prime factor here.

Initially major employers in sectors were “Indian IT service companies” like TCS/Patni/Wipro/Infosys etc. Currently IT professionals in India are employed by various companies having diverse business models e.g.
ii.) Small service companies (Indian and foreign origin)
ii.) Indian IT services (TCS/Infosys/Wipro/HCL etc …)
iii.) Global IT services companies (IBM/Accenture/Capgemini/CA/CSC/Dell/Oracle etc.
iv.) Bigger global product companies (Google/IBM/Oracle/Microsoft/Amazon etc..)
v.) Not so big global product companies which everybody may not be aware but having good cash flow and good and sustainable revenue stream.
vi.) Captive IT unites of almost all major global BFSI companies (e.g. JPMC/Morgan Stanley/RBS/Citibank/AMEX/Barclays/Deutsche B/BNYM) and also of many other companies (e.g. John Deer/VW group just as a sample), many these companies were / are major source of revenue of IT service sector.
vii.) Indian companies from more traditional business sectors (Finance/Manufacturing/Pharma/Engineering etc. etc.)
and finally
viii.) Indian companies from sunshine sectors / startups etc. (Again there is huge diversity inside)

Therefore, each business model have its unique aspects and everybody pays according to their goals / strengths / weaknesses etc. etc.

[Zappo]

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

Being niche-skilled may be lucrative, but it's also a risky proposition and not everyone's cup of tea. High-risk equates to potentially high rewards, isn't that how every marketplace works?

Absolutely, and let me give two examples.

In US when we hire for any niche skill it is inevitably on a fixed contract for 2 to 3 months to achieve a fixed objective. Recently we hired a high-end consultant in US to setup our entire Hadoop infra for a particular project. He was with us for exactly 2 months. That's all. At $500 an hour I can't think of having him with us for a very long period. At times if due to various interdependent reasons I have to keep such a guy waiting for 3 hours I am looking at $1500 down the drain. We did the entire exercise most efficiently that we could and yet a rough ballpark estimate suggests that we lost around 22 hours of billing where we could not use the consultant effectively.

When the need for a high end niche skill is for a fairly longer term we prefer to hire in India. There also there is a risk involved. Once the need is over what do you do with this person? Unlike others you can't place him in to a different project so easily. The options are fairly narrow and bleak if you hired an employee.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by adimicra

But, what do you mean by smart people doing mundane jobs?
Can you be give some examples of mundane job?

Oh, boy. You are the first guy who asked me for an example. Most jobs done in Indian IT industry can be done by high school graduates. Yet, they hire engineering graduates for that role.

I regularly ask my employees about what their friends and classmates are doing in other companies. Most of the answers are depressing. Many are in-charge of reading logs everyday, and report any errors to other teams. Some work extensively on excel, doing data entry. Some only do bug fixes in user interfaces, whenever they are reported. There are engineers documenting old code every day. A notable one I remember is an IITian who was supposed to monitor readings on the meters at an atomic power plant. [Ok, last one isn't IT, but he was making 9L at that job.]

Even in cases where they are doing something that is part of the SDLC, it is so process oriented, any literate person can do it.

[VeyronSuperSprt]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Most jobs done in Indian IT industry can be done by high school graduates. Yet, they hire engineering graduates for that role.

^^^
True. Its called Overkill.

On another note:

Our lawyers in Switzerland charge by the minute. So when I call them I have all my facts ready and as concise as is legally possible. Even a "Hey Cavigelli" costs me.

At the end of the month I get a spread sheet with the bill for every single minute. So if a call was for 2 minutes, I'm billed for 2 minutes.

Swiss timing.

[Nissan1180]

Originally Posted by VeyronSuperSprt

UBER is a classic example of IDIOTS running a business on hype rather than real cash flow.

That's not true at all. Uber has a policy of hiring around 3 key people in an office-that means three people run an operation in a city. If you look at the kind of responsibility that these people would have, it is not so difficult to appreciate the compensation structure. Same holds for other similar startups. They are lean, and they prefer hiring one guy from a good college or with exceptional work experience rather than investing in 10 mediocre people.
I read many posts about startups inflating salaries in the last few pages of this thread. While this is true for certain functions, I really don't see why it's a problem. Talent has been undervalued in India (lets accept this-our mindset has been trained to survive rather than excel). If companies are finally able to afford the right people at the right price, what's wrong with it? It's a free market.
There's also a sentiment that startups are paying a lot because they have VC money. Not true. The have VC money because they have the right set of people to make that money grow. VC's are the smart people (most of them-exceptions are always there). They look at a team before putting down a cheque. Yes, startups will fail. That has happened in the past (everywhere) and will continue to happen.The winner takes it all. But the winner is usually the company with the smartest people, who know how to think and not just what to think.

A notable one I remember is an IITian who was supposed to monitor readings on the meters at an atomic power plant. [Ok, last one isn't IT, but he was making 9L at that job.

You'd be surprised to know that in Singapore a Safety officer who goes around ensuring that everyone working in the lab wears the right set of personal protective equipment gets a salary that is a few multiples of what an average software engineer earns here. It is not his act of going around that counts-it is his responsibility. If he fails to prevent an accident, millions would be lost. That's why his skill set is important. To the layman, his job means nothing. But put a layman in that position, and the effects will be catastrophic.