dbd33

Maybe, but in my experience of pimping, it's easy to pressure someone who has worked cheap to stay cheap even as you sell them at the market rate. One snag is that the first employer will be needed as a reference, his reference might be "good" ... "and cheap".

Tripitaka

At the risk of taking this thread off topic, I think that a) you are a product of your own experience (generic "you", there) and b) you aren't considering quality in the argument, only price.

If an employer is choosing from candidates that are either all the same quality, all APPEAR to be the same quality or doesn't care about quality then he will choose purely on price.

If an employer is choosing on potential and value-add, then cost will only be a factor in the decision.

Personally, I wouldn't want to work for the former in any event. With the latter, you better understand not only where your value-add is but also that it matches the employers view of what value-add is and how you can demonstrate it consistently well.

As for India, I know the score there. I work for HP and we employ most of them!

dbd33

It was your idea to sell on price, even offering the poor poster for zero dollars. I'm suggesting that, if one does this, one risks starting a price war from which no-one will emerge a winner.

"value-add" is a form of management jargon new to me. What does it mean?

ireland2canada

I find that the ability to leverage your own diversity is an essential value-add.

dbd33

I cultivate your comments, but can you demonstrate, consistently well, that your employer considers diversity leveragification a value-add even when self applied?

Tripitaka

It is bait, nothing more than an opportunity to get the employer to take an interest with little or no risk to themselves in order to demonstrate your capabilities. It must be time-bound openly from the start; if the employer knows that you are only prepared to work on a lower rate indefinitely then there isn't a temptation for him to bring you on board for such a short period as there will be at least some overhead for him. You must be prepared to walk away at the end of the period if the employer has failed to be convinced of your value-add.



Value-add isn't really jargon but is often mis-understood in a world focussed only on price. The key word is value and it means something different to each individual because the things that we value are unique to each of us. It is the basic driver behind a transaction of any sort - again, not only talking money here.

An employer will have a paradigm (sorry, thats probably more jargon...a mental model of how he perceives the world and everything in it) on what he considers valuable. As a business, they will want to attain all of those values at the lowest cost.

As an employee, you will have a completely different set of values. Some, but certainly not all, of your values will align with your employer but here is the thing that a lot of people seeking work fail on.

You need to understand to the greatest degree you possibly can, what your prospective employers values are then you need to demonstrate that you can not only meet them, but exceed their expectations of you meeting them. You need to stand out and meet/exceed more of them than any other employee if you want to avoid being judged on cost alone. Value-add therefore, is simply how much you can contribute to the values desired by the other party in the transaction, in this case the employer.

It all falls down for lots of folks because they are only, or mainly, focussed on their own values or desires. The employer knows and expects this so treats everyone equally at the start, thus, everyone is judged on the only common denominator of cost. This is where the opportunity to lies in going in at zero or low cost on a limited period; get the opportunity by appearing valuable on cost but with an open an honest approach with the employer that you are doing it so you can demonstrate how much value you can add. At the end of the period, you have an equally open conversation with the employer on how much he feels your value is worth to him; if the price he has differs from the price you feel you are worth then you walk away.

These are the basic rules of contracting in any industry but certainly in IT in the UK. As a contractor, you get a 3 month contract and you are judged on that; if you perform well enough, you get a renewal and if not, you get binned. If you are outstanding, you get a rate rise if a) the employer recognises that you have skills he wants to keep and cannot easily get elsewhere (although you will more than likely get an immediate permanent employment offer) or b) the employer recognises your value as being worth more than your cost and you ask for a rate rise.

It is simple stuff but like common sense, the problem is, understanding it isn't very common.

Tripitaka

Maybe I should add a point here that might not be understood by all.

I've seen a few posts on this and other forums complaining that Canada has a "closed" jobs market; that most jobs aren't advertised. It isn't just Canada; there was a study done in the UK a few years back that found that only 3-5% of available roles are actually advertised anywhere. The rest are filled by word of mouth.

Why is that? Well, check out my last post. If you are an employer and someone you know and trust knows that you have a vacancy and they know someone that could fill it, then chances are it is a done deal. Why would you got to the time and expense of advertising it when you can get a candidate that comes with at least some pre-vetting and a reference?

I only fill roles from my network. Ever.

This is why JBE's info on networking is so valid - it is crucial to success. Sure, you might score lucky but with a great network that you have invested time and effort in with an approach of "What can I do for them?" rather than "What can they do for me?", you will get lucky far more often.

dbd33

He has a duty to shareholders, an obligation to make money, it would be unprofessional of him to consider anything but price. We're talking jobs here, not dating.

I suggest that this is a naive view of the contract market in the UK and a way off base in the Canadian context. Firstly, contracts in Canada are primarily about circumventing employment laws, an IT contractor isn't typically taken on the expectation of the contract lasting months but decades; it's a "contract" solely to give the employer an option to dump the employee. Secondly, the choice of contractor isn't typically about ability, lots of people can do the jobs available, the ones who get the work have pimps who put up good bribes and work the supplier lists well. No one gets a rate rise based on skills or competence, typically a contractors rate rise comes from the pimp's share of the billing, the increase is brought on by fear of the contractor wandering off to the US.

JonboyE

Create value, I think, rather than make money. Price is only one component of value - in many cases the least important.

Your business seems somewhat a-typical.

Tripitaka

I think I understand your paradigm now. It could do with some work though if you are open-minded enough to consider that might be possible. JBE is right on the money below and another consideration would be non-public private companies (no shareholders) or voluntary organisations (charities etc). It isn't worth me writing more unless you are prepared to reconsider your view.



I have no objection to the suggestion. Let me offer my brief credentials as a counter argument:

I have employed contractors in the IT market for 22 years and in the heating and plumbing trade for 7 years. I have worked as a contractor for 5 years and my wife has been an IT contractor for the last 10 years. I have monthly calls with agencies and headhunters and great relationships with them. I locate and supply at least 10 people per year to these agencies through my network.

I may be way off base for the Canadian market but two things I do understand are UK contracting an networking. As different as the Canadian market may or may not be, some aspects of this are generic and will fit either market.

With only your mails in this thread to work from, you seem quite bitter and negative about your work situation. Your description of the price war and terms like "pimp" suggest that you have probably had bad experiences that have formed your paradigm through emotional experience. Is there anything positive you could consider posting on this topic that might help me change my view.

dbd33

Not emotional, no. Buying and selling people is what we do, it's just business.

I can't see that I'd want to change your view. I make a steady living supplying contractors and have done so, in Canada, for twenty odd years. I think it's all about price. You think fuzzy factors are important. Good luck to you.

Oscardon

So who can get me a job then lol.

BobbyN

good information i will change my CV also

Souvy

Quite. I just got off the phone with a tart of mine in Boston.

"I want this, this and this, by then. Five man-days at $2k per day. OK?"
"Yup".

My client has no idea who my tart is and will not ask the question. The tart knew who the client was before I told him. He'd worked it out. He knows his stuff. That's why I use him.

He has a wife and kids, apparently. Not that I care.

dbd33

That's how it's done. Worse case he'll say "Wisconsin in January?!" or "that sweatshop again?!" and you'll have to go to $2200. I can do that.

Lately though I have been obliged to deal with managing "staff", people employed by a company that's a client of mine. I'm used to managing contractors, for our firm, for other people, all sorts of arrangements but all geared to getting some project or other completed. That I can do, contractors want to do the job and get paid and that's all. Contractors have either been around forever and so know to shut up and get on with it, or new and disposable.

Staff are shit to deal with; I'm obliged to make a weak pretence of interest in them as people, I'm obliged to take into account that getting the job done isn't a motivation for them, I'm supposed to care about their personality clashes and political issues. What will happen, of course, is that eventually the staff will sit in a room and be paid not to get the job done and I'll bring in a few ugly paid-by-the-hour people and we'll do it.