ITIL and Six Sigma? They're looking for the wrong skills.
If that's his complaint, he's right. I'm not going to waste my time memorizing a series of 'comprehensive checklists' in college. I doubt I know a single CS/Math student who has done more than peruse the Wikipedia article (or maybe read a book in their spare time if they're feeling particularly masochistic) on Six Sigma - and I like to think that I know many great students in the field (several who've worked for Google, Sun, NSA, Microsoft Research, etc).
There have been many times that I've said 'Damn, I wish I knew more about X.' In the last week alone X has included POMDPs, multi-dimensional interval trees, or functors. I have never, not once, wished I knew more about the management fad du jour.
HCL (like Infosys, TCS Wipro etc) is a body shopper firm and has nothing much to do with "Computer Science" or the cool things you mention (multidimensional interval trees, POMDP etc). Mr Nayar is just saying that he thinks American Graduates don't have the kind of crap enterprise buzzword "skills" that he can sell to clueless managers at x $/hr. Mr Nayar and his firm wouldn't know what to do with someone who is really good at Computer Science or Math, because those are not the "markets" he addresses. I would imagine an American grad student would be happy to be unemployable (by Mr Nayar).
Really this is just a bodyshopper trying to justify why he isn't hiring costly Americans (vs cheap Indians). Of course he can't say "I am looking for cheap bodies to ship offshore and Americans are expensive", and still retian his job. These mumblings aren't worthy of being upset over.
Due Disclosure: I am Indian. I work in India (Bangalore to be precise), but I do work with POMDPs, MultiDimensional Interval Trees and so on ;-) (My latest project is in Robotic Vision and Navigation, for the Indian Defence Dept)
The best way to learn about management fad du jour is to be subjected to it. And the main, perhaps only, thing worth learning about it is that you want to avoid it.
I disagree. If they were a startup looking to develop some new technology or website then maybe six sigma and ITIL wouldn't come into play. But in looking for ways to manage an IT help desk for a company in which they could see thousands of help desk tickets per day, six sigma is the best and most well understood tool available today to help them reduce expenses and greatly improve processes. Six sigma is much more than a comprehensive checklist in this regard.
Plus, I think you're perhaps misunderstanding where his company is coming from. They're not necessarily looking for computer scientists to write code or design new systems in most cases. Instead, they're looking for information systems specialists to be able to quickly and efficiently solve IT issues for their customer, and managers of those specialists to ensure they do it as efficiently as possible.
I call BS; and I live in Bangalore, and I run a software company.
Over the last 8 years I have worked with dozens of American programmers, and on an average they are better than their Indian counterparts. His own company (HCL) employs some of the people who I thought formed the bottom of the class. Yet another senior programmer in another IT major (TCS) who was a CS grad, thought he was writing code for a new 16 bit computer.
From the article itself, it is easy to see what he considers talent: following Six Sigma, CMM etc. Guess what, CMM itself is so ridiculously outdated that only Indian IT companies seek it. In a CMM review I was part of in 2007, they said 80% were Indian IT companies. Needless to say, there are more failed projects that successful ones.
Our website says "Made in India"; but sadly, thanks to these IT companies it could be mistaken as a 'Process-driven, cheap, intellect-independent way of building software'.
These massive "brick-in-the-wall", "Enterprise" Indian IT Companies compete exclusively on "hourly-billing-rate".
There is hope in sight, but they come from smaller, newer companies.
As we all know, there is no silver bullet, that will miraculously rescue the ailing software engineering.
Yesteryear's process becomes today's joke. It's unfortunate that Indian companies are madly following the buzz words/process without understanding how it is supposed to work.
In other words, universities are still not good at producing the code monkeys that Mr. Nayar requires to run his body shops. Now if someone could explain to me why that is a bad thing?
If you read the article he doesn't say those things should be taught as CS degrees. The exact phrase is "They're far less inclined ... to spend their time" which implies what they're doing above and beyond their formal education.
Would you hire a graduate who wasn't inclined to spend their time learning about version control, bug tracking or release management systems (all of which are part of the ITIL standard) ?
A lot of ITIL isn't that much different from what you find in Code Complete or the Pragmatic Programmer books on deployment. Just because you prefer your buzzword to their buzzword, doesn't mean it's any more important.
Frankly, his complaints are why the West has nothing to fear from India any time soon. As an Indian, there is nothing more important than external verification of one's social status. For example, in India, they ISO certify everything. FFS, the number one dating (I wish I could use strikethrough on HN and put matrimonial after, but c'est la vie) website for Indians is ISO certified: http://www.shaadi.com/customer_relations/faq/iso-certificati...
Indians are fantastic at rote memorization and will listen to directions to the letter - no freelancing there. To India's benefit, it should mean that they'll be spitting out really, really good cars (as long as they're designed elsewhere) and large industrial output in the near future.
"Indians are fantastic at rote memorization" , and you know what being an Indian, I hate that lot of the crowd. There is a lack of independent thinkers here, and the rotten education system that puts emphasis on memorization (eg. my college) are the ones responsible for creating such a crowd of fantastic memorizers...
I wish they encouraged more of learning by doing here and we could've had better people to boast about.
You're being too hard on India. In every country there is a small % of talented programmers. Many of those smart Indian programmers are doing fantastic work in grad schools around the world. They are a huge part of Silicon Valley (as are Chinese ex-pats). Of course, there's a larger % of code monkeys. Indian code monkeys are, IMO, better than American code monkeys because they follow instructions and work hard despite their limited talents. Rote memorization and checklists and "process" are necessary to get less capable programmers to function.
Frankly, his complaints are why the West has nothing to fear from India any time soon.
Well, the rich countries aren't going to lose their edge in tech innovation in the short term, but that doesn't mean that a lot of jobs won't continue to migrate to poorer countries.
This is an old tune though -- as technologies slip away from the leading edge they tend to relocate to places where they can be produced at a lower cost. It sounds like what the CEO quoted in the article is saying is that Americans don't fit the bill for that kind of development.
In international trade with the US, it is sometimes important for foreign companies to have some sort of quality / improvement program in place. It garners better trust. There may have been a culture of implementing these programs and it simply became a standard operating procedure. I'm not sure if this is the case but it wouldn't surprise me. Along the same lines, if India does have a culture of memorization, it might be best that they establish rigid business practices to keep themselves as productive as possible.
HCL and other employers need to have a greater influence on the tech curricula of U.S. colleges and universities, to make them more real-world and rigorous. For the most part, he said, those institutions haven't been receptive to such industry partnerships.
In my experience, the largest influence of employers on schools has been the pervasiveness of Java in higher education. Since it's now all but obvious how horribly short-sighted "teaching Java in college" turned out to be, I think the burden of proof is on him to explain why teaching everyone "ITIL, Six Sigma, and the like" isn't equally short-sighted.
In an interview following his presentation, Vineet said HCL and other employers need to have a greater influence on the tech curricula of U.S. colleges and universities, to make them more real-world and rigorous.
Hahahaha .. if Six Sigma is more "real world" and rigorous than what they teach in good CS programs in the US, I am Warren Buffett.
God forbid Vineet here gets his wishes about influence with U.S. colleges, because if he does, bank on the number of great engineers graduating from these schools dropping precipitously.
What HCL CEO was saying is true, American Grads are not employable because they are interested in creating new technology and starting new start ups, Ideal American grad wants to start a startup.And look its the American started google, microsoft, ibm, youtube etc... If you want perfect employee who want to maintain the 10 year old technology created by American companies you can get it only from india and China. I never seen an Indian created new product that changes world. Apart from creating bull shit products for maintaining documents for Sig Sigma , iso 9001, CRM etc. --- Angry young Indian.
You can start by creating a product that changes India. Americans are predominantly the ones who do startups because America is the biggest player in the global economy, and no one understands American culture, desires, and needs quite better than America.
Look at Shaadi.com. A site like that would have fallen flat on its face in America. Conversely, a site like Match.com and eHarmony would be really unsuccessful in India.
You have a unique opportunity in India. There are tons of startups that could only be done in India, and not in America. These startups need to be done by Indians, not by Americans. The track record of American VC's in India isn't very good, they just don't "get it".
Historically, business in India has been dominated by the big family players- the Ambami's, the Birla's, the Tata's. This is because every business in India has a huge government overhead to deal with- it's hard to go above the mom-and-pop level without dealing with the corruption and bureaucracy that plagues India.
The Internet changes all that. More and more people are getting wired. The local politicians, the corrupt officials that want bribes, and all the other authorities can't control you in cyberspace. You instantly eliminate all that overhead!
So go and develop your idea! It's stupid to speak in terms of generalizations and stereotypes. Yes, there's a large culture gap between America and India- this makes it hard for Indians to innovate- it's hard to cross that chasm and understand our needs.
But there's nothing stopping you from developing a site just for Indians. The Indian version of cyberspace is basically like 1997. Everyone is still building these big "portals". Indian newspapers are still coming online. American companies are just using India as a bodyshop and not really serving India's needs.
Stop thinking about how India can cater to the US, and start thinking about how India can cater to India. Once India does this, India can control her own destiny and become the superpower it so badly wants to be.
What he's observing is that his jobs--the ones given to outsourcing companies--have diverged from the ones taken by companies in Western wealthier countries.
It ought to be so: if Americans and Indians were competing for the same jobs, the current difference in salaries couldn't have been sustained for so long. Most people who have worked with outsourcing know the limits, especially in terms of initiative, understanding or even common sense, of what can be done successfully by Indian IT companies.
The whole article only makes sense for people who think that "guys who are paid to do stuff on a computer" are a single, mostly uniform resource. What is very worrying is that this illiterate understanding seems to be held by top executives of international IT companies.
The article makes a case for "the failure of the U.S. education system to prepare the country's next-generation tech workforce":
Many American grads looking to enter the tech field are preoccupied with getting rich, Vineet said. They're far less inclined than students from developing countries ... to spend their time learning the "boring" details of tech process, methodology, and tools--ITIL, Six Sigma, and the like.
I have been managing a portion of my company's Indian outsourcing operations for the last two years. Speaking in generalities, I think that the system over there privileges "methodologies" and certifications over both core skills and core CS concepts.
I have talented Java engineers working for me who I have had to teach regular expressions to. Many American engineers with graduate degrees in CS from a good university would be able to predict that /ab+/ matched the string "abc". It would be unlikely in the extreme for them to have never heard of the word "regular expression" before. I am oh for five on this with my most recent five Indian engineers. Even after teaching them basic regular expressions I have not found them capable of using them to accomplish tasks without specific direction.
(For example, if someVariableName is used in the project, and the customer later informs us that our naming of it does not match their understanding, we might have to rewrite that variable name and associated variables and methods globally. It should be trivial to find all instances of that with a search by regexp, right? But they don't hear that in the instruction "X is now called Y, change all appropriate variables and methods" -- instead, two days later I'm told they're done with a job that I expected to take a few hours, and then I fire a regexp against the source tree and see that 40% of it is still not done.)
I have frequently had to explain bugs to our engineers which resulted not from chance or carelessness but from simple ignorance of core CS101 concepts, such as pass by reference. (Example: In our first code review, I noticed a lot of reuse of HashMaps to carry parameters to DAOs. I told folks to not reuse them, because that introduces the risk of somebody changing the HashMap in the DAO, thus causing later users of the map to have unexpected behavior. I was told, by our most talented Indian engineer, that this would not happen because the values in the HashMap would magically spring back after the DAO was done with it. This does not happen, and it is a CS101 misconception. Sure enough, we had bugs caused by reuse. So, after a remedial CS101 lecture to the team, I reiterated that maps were not to be reused, because they would cause bugs. What do I find in Code Review #2? More reuse of HashMaps, with "final" applied to all of them. Final does not magically turn pass-by-reference into pass-by-value. (The fact that this obviously did not fix the bugs and would have been caught by ANY testing of the code is another matter. We get that a lot.)
When I ask our engineers what they wanted to accomplish in terms of professional growth in their time in Japan, the answer was unanimous: study for certs, which they all already had several of. I'm not necessarily hostile to certs in theory, but I'm sure starting to cool to them in practice.
As for teaching "tools": I won't be too harsh on India because American universities fail at it, too, but if they're teaching fundamentals of source control or IDEs I have yet to see any evidence of it. We have been trying to change a corporate culture at our Indian partners away from having one "source control master" per twenty engineers. They're the only ones permitted to commit -- everyone else mails their code to the source control master, who integrates it. This is to "stop people from breaking the build".
Our Indian colleagues have their own requests for us. For example, they would prefer not to use source control, "since it adds overhead to our management processes".
I freely admit that I only have seen about three corporate cultures from over there and may just have terrible, terrible luck.
[Edited to add: Neither my company nor I are blameless for this state of affairs. Believe me, we have many, many areas we could improve upon collectively, and I have many, many individual weakpoints, including a longstanding cavalierness about how much testing needs to be done prior to shipping. I don't want it to sound just like I'm blaming our Indian colleagues.]
Get it? Lower your expectations! Do not want to get rich! Want to work for the same amount as people from undeveloped economies! Then maybe you can find a place in the organization of this top CEO, if you're lucky enough.
Having worked with Indian Developers I would never suggest anyone be trained to not be able to see the "big picture" or not be able to take instructions longer then one sentence. It's insane and this person is right, American graduates just can't think that way however, McDonald's workers CAN think that way. He is looking in the wrong place for employees, he needs to cull employees from the fast food industry who can do one step then stop, one stop then stop, one step then stop, and be happy with that lifestyle.
I don't think Mr. Vineet is incorrect when he suggests that most American grads are unemployable. Most people are, in fact, not employable as software developers.
The funny thing is, I actually found the Indian outsourcing teams I worked with nearly unusable as well. It may have to do with culture.
I gave broad, general guidance about what we needed to do (store the millions of variables in a non-linear program in memory in an efficient data structure), and I got back code that used arrays. It's just one single example, of course, but a result like that is enough to want to dismiss the entire team and start over.
But you know, I doubt Americans are producing all that many programmers who can do this either.
I guess a better title would have been: "Top Indian CEO: Most American Grads Are 'Unemployable' for his firm"
In my opinion, this article and his views do not deserve too much attention. But it scares me how top management of some of these so called 'software development' firms trends to drift away from reality, and just start equating developing software to having an assembly line like process.
I have no experience working with Indian outsourcing companies, so for now I'll just accept the general consensus here.
Ok, if it's true that these people lack initiative, but are very good at following directions, then can one game the system to get essentially a parallel processor made out of humans?
This would require the Indian outsourcing firms to be programmable. I.e. what's the overhead in uploading your own custom process / methodology, and training people on it? Do the benefits of scale outweigh the "re-tooling" time?
While the skills he are looking for are not something I think need to be taught, my experiences with classmates showed me that most don't have any idea what they are doing. In a class where we were supposed to be learning assembly language, I had to explain to more then a few people what the System.out.println() function did and java, and how to concatenate two strings. I'm unsure of how they couldn't figure this out by a 300 level course.
[+] [-] smanek|16 years ago|reply
If that's his complaint, he's right. I'm not going to waste my time memorizing a series of 'comprehensive checklists' in college. I doubt I know a single CS/Math student who has done more than peruse the Wikipedia article (or maybe read a book in their spare time if they're feeling particularly masochistic) on Six Sigma - and I like to think that I know many great students in the field (several who've worked for Google, Sun, NSA, Microsoft Research, etc).
There have been many times that I've said 'Damn, I wish I knew more about X.' In the last week alone X has included POMDPs, multi-dimensional interval trees, or functors. I have never, not once, wished I knew more about the management fad du jour.
[+] [-] plinkplonk|16 years ago|reply
Really this is just a bodyshopper trying to justify why he isn't hiring costly Americans (vs cheap Indians). Of course he can't say "I am looking for cheap bodies to ship offshore and Americans are expensive", and still retian his job. These mumblings aren't worthy of being upset over.
Due Disclosure: I am Indian. I work in India (Bangalore to be precise), but I do work with POMDPs, MultiDimensional Interval Trees and so on ;-) (My latest project is in Robotic Vision and Navigation, for the Indian Defence Dept)
[+] [-] thwarted|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dca|16 years ago|reply
Plus, I think you're perhaps misunderstanding where his company is coming from. They're not necessarily looking for computer scientists to write code or design new systems in most cases. Instead, they're looking for information systems specialists to be able to quickly and efficiently solve IT issues for their customer, and managers of those specialists to ensure they do it as efficiently as possible.
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] jeswin|16 years ago|reply
Over the last 8 years I have worked with dozens of American programmers, and on an average they are better than their Indian counterparts. His own company (HCL) employs some of the people who I thought formed the bottom of the class. Yet another senior programmer in another IT major (TCS) who was a CS grad, thought he was writing code for a new 16 bit computer.
From the article itself, it is easy to see what he considers talent: following Six Sigma, CMM etc. Guess what, CMM itself is so ridiculously outdated that only Indian IT companies seek it. In a CMM review I was part of in 2007, they said 80% were Indian IT companies. Needless to say, there are more failed projects that successful ones.
Our website says "Made in India"; but sadly, thanks to these IT companies it could be mistaken as a 'Process-driven, cheap, intellect-independent way of building software'.
These massive "brick-in-the-wall", "Enterprise" Indian IT Companies compete exclusively on "hourly-billing-rate".
There is hope in sight, but they come from smaller, newer companies.
[+] [-] muon|16 years ago|reply
Yesteryear's process becomes today's joke. It's unfortunate that Indian companies are madly following the buzz words/process without understanding how it is supposed to work.
[+] [-] voidpointer|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ig1|16 years ago|reply
Would you hire a graduate who wasn't inclined to spend their time learning about version control, bug tracking or release management systems (all of which are part of the ITIL standard) ?
A lot of ITIL isn't that much different from what you find in Code Complete or the Pragmatic Programmer books on deployment. Just because you prefer your buzzword to their buzzword, doesn't mean it's any more important.
[+] [-] zaidf|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vinutheraj|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sachinag|16 years ago|reply
Indians are fantastic at rote memorization and will listen to directions to the letter - no freelancing there. To India's benefit, it should mean that they'll be spitting out really, really good cars (as long as they're designed elsewhere) and large industrial output in the near future.
[+] [-] ideamonk|16 years ago|reply
I wish they encouraged more of learning by doing here and we could've had better people to boast about.
[+] [-] silverlake|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wheels|16 years ago|reply
Well, the rich countries aren't going to lose their edge in tech innovation in the short term, but that doesn't mean that a lot of jobs won't continue to migrate to poorer countries.
This is an old tune though -- as technologies slip away from the leading edge they tend to relocate to places where they can be produced at a lower cost. It sounds like what the CEO quoted in the article is saying is that Americans don't fit the bill for that kind of development.
[+] [-] ssharp|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] yters|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] scscsc|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andreyf|16 years ago|reply
In my experience, the largest influence of employers on schools has been the pervasiveness of Java in higher education. Since it's now all but obvious how horribly short-sighted "teaching Java in college" turned out to be, I think the burden of proof is on him to explain why teaching everyone "ITIL, Six Sigma, and the like" isn't equally short-sighted.
[+] [-] ajju|16 years ago|reply
Hahahaha .. if Six Sigma is more "real world" and rigorous than what they teach in good CS programs in the US, I am Warren Buffett.
God forbid Vineet here gets his wishes about influence with U.S. colleges, because if he does, bank on the number of great engineers graduating from these schools dropping precipitously.
[+] [-] prtamil|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unexpected|16 years ago|reply
Look at Shaadi.com. A site like that would have fallen flat on its face in America. Conversely, a site like Match.com and eHarmony would be really unsuccessful in India.
You have a unique opportunity in India. There are tons of startups that could only be done in India, and not in America. These startups need to be done by Indians, not by Americans. The track record of American VC's in India isn't very good, they just don't "get it".
Historically, business in India has been dominated by the big family players- the Ambami's, the Birla's, the Tata's. This is because every business in India has a huge government overhead to deal with- it's hard to go above the mom-and-pop level without dealing with the corruption and bureaucracy that plagues India.
The Internet changes all that. More and more people are getting wired. The local politicians, the corrupt officials that want bribes, and all the other authorities can't control you in cyberspace. You instantly eliminate all that overhead!
So go and develop your idea! It's stupid to speak in terms of generalizations and stereotypes. Yes, there's a large culture gap between America and India- this makes it hard for Indians to innovate- it's hard to cross that chasm and understand our needs.
But there's nothing stopping you from developing a site just for Indians. The Indian version of cyberspace is basically like 1997. Everyone is still building these big "portals". Indian newspapers are still coming online. American companies are just using India as a bodyshop and not really serving India's needs.
Stop thinking about how India can cater to the US, and start thinking about how India can cater to India. Once India does this, India can control her own destiny and become the superpower it so badly wants to be.
--an ABCD
[+] [-] Arun2009|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fab13n|16 years ago|reply
It ought to be so: if Americans and Indians were competing for the same jobs, the current difference in salaries couldn't have been sustained for so long. Most people who have worked with outsourcing know the limits, especially in terms of initiative, understanding or even common sense, of what can be done successfully by Indian IT companies.
The whole article only makes sense for people who think that "guys who are paid to do stuff on a computer" are a single, mostly uniform resource. What is very worrying is that this illiterate understanding seems to be held by top executives of international IT companies.
[+] [-] baha_man|16 years ago|reply
Ireland? A developing country? I don't think so.
[+] [-] puzzle-out|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] quizbiz|16 years ago|reply
Many American grads looking to enter the tech field are preoccupied with getting rich, Vineet said. They're far less inclined than students from developing countries ... to spend their time learning the "boring" details of tech process, methodology, and tools--ITIL, Six Sigma, and the like.
[+] [-] patio11|16 years ago|reply
I have talented Java engineers working for me who I have had to teach regular expressions to. Many American engineers with graduate degrees in CS from a good university would be able to predict that /ab+/ matched the string "abc". It would be unlikely in the extreme for them to have never heard of the word "regular expression" before. I am oh for five on this with my most recent five Indian engineers. Even after teaching them basic regular expressions I have not found them capable of using them to accomplish tasks without specific direction.
(For example, if someVariableName is used in the project, and the customer later informs us that our naming of it does not match their understanding, we might have to rewrite that variable name and associated variables and methods globally. It should be trivial to find all instances of that with a search by regexp, right? But they don't hear that in the instruction "X is now called Y, change all appropriate variables and methods" -- instead, two days later I'm told they're done with a job that I expected to take a few hours, and then I fire a regexp against the source tree and see that 40% of it is still not done.)
I have frequently had to explain bugs to our engineers which resulted not from chance or carelessness but from simple ignorance of core CS101 concepts, such as pass by reference. (Example: In our first code review, I noticed a lot of reuse of HashMaps to carry parameters to DAOs. I told folks to not reuse them, because that introduces the risk of somebody changing the HashMap in the DAO, thus causing later users of the map to have unexpected behavior. I was told, by our most talented Indian engineer, that this would not happen because the values in the HashMap would magically spring back after the DAO was done with it. This does not happen, and it is a CS101 misconception. Sure enough, we had bugs caused by reuse. So, after a remedial CS101 lecture to the team, I reiterated that maps were not to be reused, because they would cause bugs. What do I find in Code Review #2? More reuse of HashMaps, with "final" applied to all of them. Final does not magically turn pass-by-reference into pass-by-value. (The fact that this obviously did not fix the bugs and would have been caught by ANY testing of the code is another matter. We get that a lot.)
When I ask our engineers what they wanted to accomplish in terms of professional growth in their time in Japan, the answer was unanimous: study for certs, which they all already had several of. I'm not necessarily hostile to certs in theory, but I'm sure starting to cool to them in practice.
As for teaching "tools": I won't be too harsh on India because American universities fail at it, too, but if they're teaching fundamentals of source control or IDEs I have yet to see any evidence of it. We have been trying to change a corporate culture at our Indian partners away from having one "source control master" per twenty engineers. They're the only ones permitted to commit -- everyone else mails their code to the source control master, who integrates it. This is to "stop people from breaking the build".
Our Indian colleagues have their own requests for us. For example, they would prefer not to use source control, "since it adds overhead to our management processes".
I freely admit that I only have seen about three corporate cultures from over there and may just have terrible, terrible luck.
[Edited to add: Neither my company nor I are blameless for this state of affairs. Believe me, we have many, many areas we could improve upon collectively, and I have many, many individual weakpoints, including a longstanding cavalierness about how much testing needs to be done prior to shipping. I don't want it to sound just like I'm blaming our Indian colleagues.]
[+] [-] kqr2|16 years ago|reply
Many corporations are looking to enter the tech field are preoccupied with getting rich
Of course, corporations want a cheap labor workforce that they don't have to train.
A good college education should give you a solid foundation for learning new things; not just job training.
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] scscsc|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gscott|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] geebee|16 years ago|reply
The funny thing is, I actually found the Indian outsourcing teams I worked with nearly unusable as well. It may have to do with culture.
I gave broad, general guidance about what we needed to do (store the millions of variables in a non-linear program in memory in an efficient data structure), and I got back code that used arrays. It's just one single example, of course, but a result like that is enough to want to dismiss the entire team and start over.
But you know, I doubt Americans are producing all that many programmers who can do this either.
[+] [-] luckystrike|16 years ago|reply
In my opinion, this article and his views do not deserve too much attention. But it scares me how top management of some of these so called 'software development' firms trends to drift away from reality, and just start equating developing software to having an assembly line like process.
[+] [-] heresy|16 years ago|reply
I'm sorry my education didn't prepare me to be a dumb ass robot. Oh wait, no, I'm not.
And enjoying my intellectually satisfiying job.
[+] [-] alecco|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JabavuAdams|16 years ago|reply
Ok, if it's true that these people lack initiative, but are very good at following directions, then can one game the system to get essentially a parallel processor made out of humans?
This would require the Indian outsourcing firms to be programmable. I.e. what's the overhead in uploading your own custom process / methodology, and training people on it? Do the benefits of scale outweigh the "re-tooling" time?
[+] [-] devicenull|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|16 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] zandorg|16 years ago|reply
The BCS (British Computer Society, whose President I met in 2003), sets targets for University CS degrees in the UK. "BCS accredited".