[OT] Extra time spent

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 8 June 2014 at 09:20:45 UTC, SomeDude wrote:
> Unfortunately, commercial's bonus is based on their selling
> performance, so they will sell anything they can, even if it
> doesn't exist yet. Especially if they need to win a contract in
> face of competitors.
> OTOH, if the contract is won, the company has an obligation to
> deliver.

That's where the real management begins. Sometimes it's possible 
to reschedule the agreements or allocate more resources on the 
project.

>> I've saw some programmers complaining about their managers, 
>> but what I really would like to see are these programmers 
>> joining together to convince the manager the problems with 
>> fast and low quality software, and how their company will lose 
>> money fixing it later.
>>
>> Matheus.
>
> It's hard, because most managaers more or less know that, and
> they prefer to get the money right away and deal with tech 
> issues
> later, hoping that they are overblown by the dev team and won't
> jeopardize entirely the project.
>
>   From an economic POV, it's the right thing to do. The benefit 
> of
> this is getting the contract in face of the competition; but if
> the quality is too low, the risk is losing the customer at the
> end and getting a bad reputation.

Our managers believe bugs are much more expensive than quality 
software development to the point we have the word that nobody 
cares how long you develop the feature, the only concern is 
whether it will work well. Nothing stops the customer from 
charging compensations from your company for disasters while you 
are fixing the bugs, it costs them nothing and they don't mind 
easy money. The result is the same: the customer has the quality 
software, but you've lost lots of money. So it's probably not the 
right economic strategy. It also means the customer had enough 
time on his hands until the software matured.