Battling to find software developers for your team or clients? Haven’t hired anyone in months and the pressure is building? This may be a thought-process game changer for you if it wasn’t common sense before.

The software development market is hot. Developers it seems are in short supply and filling positions is challenging.

Over the last few months I have been getting 2-3 Linkedin requests ,  messages and emails a week trying to get me to move jobs. This should have been flattering, but then I saw the kind of attention my peers were getting. I seem to be suffering from a mild tinge of jealousy akin to an instagram attention whore who just got upstaged by someone with more likes.

I hear stories of devs being hounded with daily calls , emails and endless Linkedin requests by recruiters and companies trying desperately to fill their open developer positions. One dev complained on his Linkedin page of being called unsolicited by a recruiter at his desk at his current employer. They literally asked the secretary to put them through , and made no secret of why they were calling. Reddit threads abound with ways to avoid recruiter “spam” , which is how developers are starting to view anyone who tries to contact them with an offer of potential employment.

Part of the reason this “shortage of developers” exists , and what I see a lot of nowadays , is the insistence of asking for a specific type of developer when recruiting. It isn’t (entirely) necessary.

Twisted Thinking

Here’s a typical advert taken line for line from a well-meaning potential employer :

“We are looking for a Mid to Senior level C# developer with around 6+ years experience particularly in MVC 5, EntityFramework and SQL. HTML5, CSS3 and jQuery are a plus.”

A C#/.Net developer you say? How about a Java one? Perhaps someone who has done C++? What about someone who’s done a bit of ruby (not rails)?  If they’re good , they will be capable of picking up Visual studio , an understanding of the .Net framework and a grasp of C# in a couple of weeks. HTML 5 is not really a skill. Javascript (jQuery is a javascript library) is something that can be picked up pretty quickly if you’ve fiddled with web stuff before and the basics of CSS most devs can grasp in a week or two.

Theres a risk that I describe moving tech stacks as more trivial than it is in reality. Maybe you won’t be perfectly competent from day one, and maybe you’ll need to do more Googling , and maybe you’ll initially be slower, but you’ll end up with just as good a result a few months down the line all things considered. Most importantly , you will not be an imaginary dev out there in the marketplace that one hopes to hire. You will be a bum in a seat producing work.

This type of thought process where complementary and “parallel” skills are considered is extremely rare for some reason. And yet , I have moved from C#/.NET to PHP to Python to Java (just a little) when duty called- and within a sensible timeframe.

It’s NOT cheaper to get a dev who “hits the ground running” anymore.

Invariably , the argument made against hiring across skillsets is cost. Companies don’t want to pay for initial ramp-up and training. They want someone to hit the ground running.

I see a major double standard with those that insist on many years of experience in their tech stack , and who complain about the lack of candidates , while at the same time spending 4-8 months on getting a candidate in and losing progress and business worth many times what they would have spent on simply getting a new hire up and running.

Example of Transitioning to Another Language in the Real World

A number of years ago ,to get an application the data it needed, I found I had to write a web scraper. (Don’t worry – it was all within the sites TOS) . A webscraper is simply a bot that goes onto the Internet and collects data from websites for later storage.

C# was not an ideal option for this , as it was a bit clunky and overbearing for the scripty nature of what was required. Python had libraries for the job that were ideal , and was more testable than C# in this case.

And so I moved over to Python. Here is a brief outline of how it went :

Day 1 What IDE? There are so many options. Don’t know which one I like best. Test them
Day 2 Why doesn’t this interpreter do what I expect out of the box? Config time.Meh
Day 3  Colons and indentation rules are annoying me now. Why can’t I have curly brackets?
Day 4 Spent time fixing a bug that turned out to be bad indentation on my part. f$#@!
Day 4 Time to import some libraries. Why doesn’t this one install? URGH
Day 7 Python doesn’t do lists as well as C#. There should be a better construct for this.
Day 10 I’m writing more and Googling less. I’m starting to get the hang of this!
Day 11 This variable didn’t produce the output I wanted. Type changed during runtime to string. Could I force this to be strictly typed?
Day 12 It feels like Python has forced a class type structure on a language that was supposed to be modular. It's a little clunky.
Day 15 It's getting easier. Python actually isn’t so bad.
Day 20 I’m at 85% productivity. This is looking up!

Hiring in the Real World

I offer hiring managers and recruiters the following bubble chart. I have attempted to place the major languages of the day in order of their layers of abstraction (read power , or how more can be accomplished with less code, while ignoring flexibility). A couple of things to note before we start an analysis of how this chart is useful :

• It is somewhat data driven and somewhat subjective. (ie a rough guide only)
• I may be “hating” more on PHP and Ruby than is fair
• Assembly could refer to a number of intermediary languages.
• Popularity is not equal to value or application suitability

Rules for hiring using the chart :

1 You can hire at the same layer of abstraction or above

2 You cannot generally move down the order of abstraction and if you do then not by much.

3 The closer the languages are to each other , the more aligned they will be and the easier it is to transition from one to another

Example of the change in thinking :

Let’s say we have a requirement for a software developer that knows Java. We could follow the usual process and traditional thinking with this ad :

Java Developer – Blah blah company has been in the game for x long and is looking for a senior java developer. You will need to be a team player , blah blah blah and have the following skills:

Competence in the following (relative to the seniority of the role):

Java Core APIs
JDBC – creating relational databases, queries and updates
OO Principles – polymorphism, inheritance, encapsulation
Debugging
JUnit/Unit Testing Framework
EJB or Spring Framework
JPA/Hibernate
RESTful Framework
Maven/ANT
GIT

And follow this process :

1. Put out an ad for a Java developer.  5 yrs experience , Spring , EE etc required
2. Applications trickle in. No one seems to be suitable
3. Months go by
4. Contracts are lost. Application development slows. New features are delayed.
5. Urgency sets in. Someone who you wouldn’t have considered because of experience suddenly looks plausible.
6. Salaries are reluctantly raised and the ad is put out again. No takers
7. An average hire is made due to the pressure for a new developer now reaching fever pitch.

This doesn’t yield the results we are looking for. Lets change this up.

Our new method :

Software Developer Blah blah company has been in the game for x long and is looking for a senior java developer. You will need to be a team player , blah blah blah and have the following skills:

Competence in the following (relative to the seniority of the role):

Full stack , experience in Java , Ruby , C# , Go , C++ or other similar-level language required .

Relational database experience
OO Principles – polymorphism, inheritance, encapsulation
Debugging
Experience with a unit testing framework
Experience with a frontend framework and UI
Understanding and knowledge of REST
Experience using a command line build system
Experience using a code version control system

1. Put out an ad for a software developer. Quadtriple the number of applications come in.
2. Do the candidates have a solid understanding of computer science and the fundamentals of good software development? Conduct some phone interviews and pull some in for an interview
3. Get those candidates to code in the language they are most comfortable in. Tailor each coding question or task to be doable in their language.
4. Wrap up the interview process in 10 days. Hire the best person you can and then move on with the process of transitioning them to your tech stack

See the difference? The new ad and approach helps us cast as wide a net as possible while retaining the ability to quickly ramp up productivity. We almost always solve the problem of a lack of suitable candidates , and loss of progress and delays of business goals are minimized.

If you’re hiring developers and your ads look like the first example , then it’s time to change tack.

This is a short story about how we got funding for our business in mid 2012 – in a seed capital phase for a technology startup in a high growth industry we have. It is a tale of failure, of struggle and of sacrifice far more than success or glory. What follows is a little background on how we got to this point and how you can get there with your own business (which is probably the reason for you reading this article).

When you read about a startup receiving funding in a newspaper or online, what you are actually reading about is the three weeks of elation that follow that fateful phone call to tell you that the money has been approved. What you often don’t see is the mammoth effort it took to get to that point, and then the mammoth effort that is put in afterward to use the funds to create a product or get a business of the ground.

We suspect our story is not unique. As we went through the process of obtaining funding, we ran into many other entrepreneurs who were trying to do the same thing for an array of different businesses. The problems seemed to all be the same:

• Lack of access to security to back a loan (the banks were ruthless with this)
• Demanding amounts of documentation , that were also complicated and required parts that were difficult to obtain
• Incompetence on the part of funding administrators
• Long wait times for responses, and sometimes not receiving responses at all.
• Lack of proper feedback in any responses given
• Heavy administration, travel and time expended on funding applications.
• Stringent BEE requirements

Our journey started off with beep (removed for sensitivity )bank, who apparently took a “development” approach to lending. We tried them because of this. After filling in lengthy paperwork, (and spending 2 months developing a 90 page business plan) we were constantly promised a response. A representative from beep bank came to us and worked through some glitches, and it seemed to be smooth sailing from there. Hopes ran high, as beep responded positively to our ideas and concepts. We were promised, week after week, a positive response. After some Mal-administration with our application and almost six months of waiting, we simply gave up and pursued the other applications we had open. After eight months, we received a one line letter which read “Your application was rejected because inter-alia – the security you provided was not sufficient” – something, I hasten to add, could have been filtered out in five minutes during our initial consultation with the bank.

Our fortunes at this point seemed to change. The founders graduated from university and began to run the business full time. Then, by chance, through a university lecturer, we came across an IT business incubator known as Smart Xchange. This was truly a turning point for us and would be a critical and unmatched key to our eventual success. An old adage goes “it’s not what you know it’s who you know” – and Smart Xchange knew people. A lot of people. And they knew them personally. They knew what these funders were about and what they liked. The potential here was endless, and all we had to do, so we thought, was fill in the paperwork and go for glory. We were elated.

We then proceeded down a road of filling in endless paperwork and applying to every institution that provided finance – grant, loan and equity – no exceptions. We tried government funders such as the Technology Innovation fund, the NYDA and others. We tried private banks with third party surety providers.

In short summary, we wasted a lot of time over the next 8 months applying and being rejected. We still have in our files a selection of rejection letters we kept, so that we could read them again one day when we succeeded, and then again when we were rich.(The second bit we’re still hoping for).

Each process we undertook at least 3-6 months. Any application that required security was rejected. Some applications we applied for we never heard back from – specifically the National fund for technical innovation, despite follow ups. 40 hours of paperwork completed could simply be lost without an apology. What was commonplace was for a potential funder to drag you along. Delayed meetings, unavailable staff and pending documents would string applications on for months – all while we were trying to keep the business ticking over to survive.  Empty promises, exaggerated claims and assertions made by those who did not have authority to give them were the order of the day. Google, with their Umbono program to help entrepreneurs, was surprisingly one of the worst perpetrators of this. Despite these institutions poor responses, none of them turned us away on the basis of our business idea or prototypes, so we pressed on.

Special mention should be made at this point about the traditional retail banks. I’m a cynical guy, and my sensor for lies is strong, but even I was astounded at the bait and switch game that is being pulled on every unsuspecting entrepreneur. The banks love to put pretty pictures up on their buildings and in newspapers about how they help entrepreneurs. You’ll see a guy smiling behind his new restaurant kitchen, which the bank helped him to buy. “We understand your business”, they purr.  Never has such blatant treachery been so socially accepted. From the happy loan poster, the spiral downwards to the pit of despair is steep. Paperwork and impossible demands cloud you from all ends, until you crumble in desperation and head for the door. Banks don’t understand your business. They are not concerned with your well-being. They have no interest in helping the country, or the community, or taking risks, or being entrepreneurial in general. Their business is not to be pursued unless you have no other avenues.

Disillusioned with organized institutions, we moved on to private investors. We approached a few hedge funds and high net worth individuals and offered them a piece of the pie. Private guys are great when it comes to the talk, but not so great when money needs to be handed over. They will tell you they are interested and promise you the world. The only good thing about private investors is they either doesn’t respond to your proposal at all or they give you a response fairly quickly. Thus, you know when to move on and your time isn’t wasted. Also, private investors don’t like to read paperwork. They want to get in with someone that they know and trust already, and can go on the basis of the relationship instead of on credentials.

Three common rejections from private investors were that the amount we were asking for was either too small, that they didn’t dabble in our industry or that they didn’t fund our particular phase of startup. (Most want a proven product that’s already making money).

If you are applying for funding, watch these areas to save you time and trouble:

1. Don’t take any notice of what anyone says – especially fund administrators and paper pushers with no authority. Try to speak to someone who will be making the decisions. Trust what these folk do rather than what they say – in most cases it is a clearer indication of their intentions.
2. Screen possible funders quickly and carefully. We had many applications which took months where the rejection reason could be ascertained at the first meeting. Take a “trip up” list to a consultation and ask for direct and focused answers, such as “will a lack of security affect the decision?” Funding applications and funders intentions are never vague. Push for clear cut and specific answers. Be pushy and be detailed.
3. Some funders will push you to just “fill in the paperwork”, while providing you with very little upfront information about their funds and very few answers. NEVER comply with their requests. You are heading for a mountain of wasted time and energy if you do.
4. Learn how to do paperwork efficiently. You will be doing a lot of it, so have all those important documents (like your business plan, portfolio, ID document, CK1 and so on scanned so you can print them all out at short notice.). Also, application forms are almost the same, and there are electronic form filling programs to help you with the tedious task of adding common information to every form.
5. Meet a funder once initially, and then do whatever is necessary to make sure you never have to go back. Ask for their email address and phone number and then communicate via those. Travelling is expensive and time consuming.
6. If the funders seem interested in you and your idea and seem to want to focus on it, then you are on the right track. If they are more worried about their own policies and procedures, then you are probably wasting your time.
7. After you have discovered what snags might be in the way of your application, hone it to what the funder is looking for. If the funder is orientated towards funding businesses that socially beneficial, then you had better emphasize the social benefits of your business or create some if it doesn’t have any. Then actually follow through with your promises. Funders follow up and keep tabs on you, and will pull the plug if you aren’t doing what they want. Most funders will disburse funds incrementally, and stop doing so if you are not towing the line.

In the end, we obtained our funding from the DTI’s Industrial Innovation Fund and the South African Breweries Foundation. They were both well run grant funding units that focused on our idea and on us and were sold on the social outcomes of our product. They listened carefully to our ideas and gave us time to consult and present to the decision makers. They are shining examples of how funders should operate in the extreme darkness of the South African funding market.

Even though these two sources also took their time to process our applications, they took us seriously and grilled us, asking the right questions and spending the time that was necessary to take our ideas apart, and scrutinize and understand them. They also had a moderate appetite for risk, which in South Africa is rare. Funders seem to want guarantees, security and stable returns, and they don’t seem to want to compromise on any of those in the hopes of high returns. Unfortunately though, if a country wants to create jobs, risk is just something that comes with the territory. The risk must be taken.

A log was kept (handwritten to do lists) of all the things we did to get funding over the two years. We didn’t write down everything we did, but here is what we estimate was needed:

• 437 different tasks , ranging from 1 – 5 hours to complete
• Almost 1500 hours spent on meetings, paperwork and administration.
• Accounting , technical and business administration knowledge
• Knowledge of the workings of SARS
• Extensive networking meetings
• Contacts, contacts and more contacts. Get people to refer you. Ask people if they know people. You will find many opportunities and references just by telling people vaguely what you’re about and what you hope to achieve.
• A structured business support unit. For us, this was the Smart Xchange business incubator (and they did a world class job helping us), but it doesn’t have to be. Many business incubators around the country do a great job at this type of thing. (Smart Xchange for us, however, delivered the goods. Many thanks to Robynne Erwin and the team for their dedication)

All in all, this is what you can expect when seeking funding. Its dull work. It takes all the excitement and thrill out of the prospects of the business and deadens the soul somewhat. But in the end it’s worth it.

When you receive that magical phone call and are leaping all over the office in ecstasy the long hours of torment melt into the history of time and are eventually forgotten. Afterwards, the excitement and the thrill of business slowly return (as it is doing now for us) and you reach a stage where the work isn’t dull anymore.

There were times along the way when we wanted to give up and go back to our jobs – certainly there were times when giving up looked from both inside and outside as the only sensible option. Persevere. Being hard headed and not giving up is touted as a “must have” in every book on entrepreneurship I have ever read.

I now understand why.

Funding happened to us. It can happen to you to. Work Hard. Be Smart. And NEVER give up, not matter how dark the skies ahead look. It’s worth it in the end.

We hope that this article serves as inspiration to small businesses and entrepreneurs who are faced with yet another 20 page form to fill or another bank rejection letter.

Keep going.

RetroNet

There’s a very cool thing about customers.  In my experience , when they want something , there’s a very simple 3 prong model that they go about using to evaluate whether they will buy that something. Unless your customer is buying something massive from you , like a business division or a fleet of front-end loaders , they will follow this model almost to the T. I have gotten into the habit of explaining these three things to a customer over the phone before they even ask – and every time I don’t provide the information freely they enquire – like clockwork. Before I explain what that 3 prong model is , let me explain how powerful it is first.

It doesn’t seem to matter whether that customer is a business , or a consumer , or a non-profit – the model , if implemented correctly,  will overcome all sorts of crummy stuff about you and your business. If you get the model right , your customer support can be crappy. You can show up in a crumpled shirt with droopy eyes from lack of sleep (yep – that’s me). You can speak in broken English and smell of booze from the night before. Your staff can forget to answer their phones , and they can be grumpy when they do answer them. They can make mistakes. They can take a sick days leave to lie on the beach.

Your business can do all of these things, and your customer will not give a shred and will thank you profusely for being such an awesome supplier if you get the 3 prong model right. I realise it may seem like a bit of a derivative of the 4P’s of marketing (Price , Product , Price and Promotion) – but I contend promotion and place are less critical to your business if you get these three right , and that the other 2 don’t quite relate exactly to what a customer really wants from you.

Without further ado , here it is  , presented in the form of questions the customers asks when making a purchase.

Is this what I want?

Businesses lose a whole heap of money each year to not having what customers want. Note – I don’t say what you think they want , or even what is close to what they want. I’m talking about delivering exactly what they want , down to the last tiny detail. No exceptions , no details left out. EVER. One tiny thing , such as an alarm clock which ticks too loudly at night , suddenly goes from being a useful wakeup tool to being a useless insomnia generating irritation.

I went to Woolworths and found a shirt I liked. It was a sure sale for Woolworths but for one thing – the colour. I wanted a specific colour. (not an uncommon colour – pretty much a standard blue – AND THEY HAD IT IN THE PICTURES OF THE SHIRT ON THE LABEL). They didn’t have stock. They contacted all the other stores. They didn’t have it either. After spending an hour moping around the store , I got a “sorry , we can’t help”.

They lost the sale. All because they didn’t have a semi-popular colour. I didn’t spend my money at Woolworths that day. I was a disappointed chump who went home shirtless.

Don’t be like Woolworths. Don’t lose that  sure sale. Find out where customers are buying your products and services and go ask them what they are looking for. Don’t do surveys or get opinions on a new product you’ve developed. Don’t do any kind of market research. I believe market research is unnecessary and out-dated.I now believe in buying research. Right when that person wants to buy something , right before they swipe a credit card at the till or sign on the dotted line , you eavesdrop on the comments and opinions they give and then see whether they  go through with the purchase or not. That is the most potent form of product specification gathering. It was difficult before because you couldn’t very well waltz into a Woolworths and ask a customer what they thought of a product on the shelf – you would be thrown out. With the power of technology ,however ,  such as the Google Keyword Tool – there are a number of ways to get information like that right when the customer is hot to buy. Right when he has all that juicy marketing information that really matters. Right when he basically tells you all of the prerequisites to taking his money.

When you have gathered that information , make sure your products match every single detail – without exception. Even if you think you know the customers needs better than them – give them exactly what they want anyway. It can be a tough pill to swallow , but its true. Convincing customers they need something is way harder than just selling them what they already want – even if you know your idea is better. If you have to upsell on their needs go ahead , but know that you are making their choices more complicated than they need to be , and their purchasing will be delayed.

When Can You Deliver?

Always have a time frame. Even if they don’t ask for one – give it.

Customers love love love timeframes. They get off on receiving timeframes. They enjoy holding a “but you promised” card – and they enjoy it even more when they can throw the card back in your face if you don’t deliver.Customers get all excited the closer that delivery date comes , even if the thing you are selling is a boring accounting system.

Which reminds me of status updates. Its secondary to a delivery date , but it feels just as good. Send your customers SMS’s or emails to tell them stuff is happening. Even if nothing is happening , tell them you’re still thinking about them and “so and so” is dealing with the issue.

Then stick to your timeframes. Deliver on time. Always. Show up when you say you will. Get that stuff installed when you promise you will.

Delivering on your timeframes is actually easy. The trick is to give a timeframe that is an easy goal (within reason). If you know it will take 3 days – tell the customer it will take 5.  If you hope it will take an hour – say it will take 4. You will look like a boss when you deliver early , and competent when you deliver on time.

How Much Is it?

Get your pricing right. Steal your competitors pricing information and then go below it by 5%. If you have the product research done right (buying research) , then you will have exactly what the customer wants. The customer will buy a less feature rich product or an inferior product if it is cheaper and does exactly what they want. Post-purchase customer service , durability ,quality,  design and other factors (as long as they are within reason) fall flat in the face of price. They will be a very far fourth and fifth consideration to the other three. This is why so many cheap Chinese goods are such successful sellers. They’re delivered on time , are what customers want and are priced right.

I’m not suggesting you go out and sell cheap crap – far from it. But you will still make sales and generate profits if you do.

So to cap it off :

• Timeframe
• Pricing
• Match customer buying needs

And by the way , put these 3 things on your website and any other marketing material you have. Make sure you describe them in detail – each prong for each product. Detail out all aspects of the 3. Don’t skip one – EVER. Customers get frustrated when any of the above is not there.

On a recent trip to Cape Town , atop Table Mountain , I came across a magical machine that took your picture and uploaded it to a social website so you could view it later. It marked your position (presumably preset) and then all you did was stand and smile while the machine takes care of the rest.

The most remarkable thing about this system was the fact that it had but one red button. That’s all. No settings , gizmos or gadgets , just one red button with huge arrows pointing towards it with the words “push here”. It looked a little like this (not the actual machine that I used) :

This got me thinking. This example is probably the most basic computer ever built. It is the easiest possible computer to use. Any moron could work it out. This takes all the horrendous complexity out of a system and says “here – push the button , idiot”. Its almost like an insult to your intelligence to use. It brought back memories of the movie , Idiocracy.

After grappling with shell scripts for the last couple of days , it seemed almost stupid to stand there and push the button and stick my tongue out for the world to see. But it was really , really refreshing to not have to battle to get results out of a machine for once.

This machine encompasses what I believe Apple has understood for quite a while with its Iphone , but has never been able to conceptualize. So , in a shamefully self promoting fashion, I’m going to coin a new term in systems and interface design.

The Red Button Principle.

In short , this principle states:

The “red button principle” is an ideological best case scenario relating to the simplicity and ease of use of a device or interface. The more complexity reduction is achieved , and the less the user has to input to gain a result , the closer the design conforms to the red button principle. The “red button” indicates the most complexity reduction possible – when the system has only one button to make it operate.

Why the Red Button Principle Matters

This is a IQ distribution map of the world. The redder things get the more stupid the people there get. As you can see , most of the world is pretty damn dumb. If you don’t live in China ,or around Germany , you can be rest assured (much like me in SA, I fear) , that you are pretty stupid.

What can be concluded from this map is that most of the English speaking world has an IQ below 100. Not good for that super powerfully complicated tablet PC you just released (cough Android cough). What most of the world needs is ease of use , simplicity , and most of all dumbed down devices. Chuck all those fancy settings out. Automate everything. Leave nothing to be worked out (for it will not be). iPhone is a shining example of this , and it amazes me that other companies have not followed closely in their footsteps.

Next time you code something – remember the red button principle…