Hiring remote foreigners? Slow your roll, hotshot

"If I allow remote work, I'd be better off hiring programmers in Vietnam."

Sound familiar? Because that is the sound of millions of employers all over the world repeating the same old tired line. If I had a penny every time I heard some small-time Towkay-wannabe mouth off about how they'd save so much money by hiring foreign workers remotely rather than letting local talent work from home, I'd be absolutely rolling in it.

If I had a penny...

If you think this makes me sound dismissive, that's because I am. I am dismissing this line as nothing but bluster and hot air. And sit tight; I'm also about to explain why... in the Singapore context, naturally.

When it makes sense

If it's a huge MNC like, say, IBM, whose head office is in the USA and opening a regional office in Singapore, then yes, it makes total sense. Because they're already doing it. Their hiring and legal infrastructures are made for this. Even if the company is not at the scale of a large corporation, but still a respectable size, it might still make sense. It has to; plenty of these companies are doing it. The alternative is that all of them went nuts at exactly the same time... which is scarily plausible in these crazy times.

A game of expansion.

When hiring is done by the book, the host country (in this case, Singapore) and the remote country (in this case, Vietnam), both have agencies that will handle the legalities. I know because I've worked as an Agency Contractor before. These are absolutely a thing.

And of course, these agencies aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. They're a business; they expect to get paid. This will eat into whatever employers think they're saving by hiring foreign workers, remote or otherwise. But that's OK - even if these tech companies don't save that much per foreign worker they hire, at scale, it tends to add up. Enormously.

When it makes less sense

A tiny tech startup trying to follow in the footsteps of a large corporation without understanding basic realities of scale, is on what I would charitably refer to as a "fool's errand". How many would such a company hire? Five programmers? Maybe ten? Whatever the company saves in wages, is nowhere what a larger company saves when hiring hundreds of these people. And if that pittance actually counts as a win, I would be deeply concerned about the finances of said company.

You sure you can
follow in those
footsteps?

I remember a time when Steve Jobs was considered the man to emulate. He was known to be a bit of an asshole, but he had undeniable talent, and thus he succeeded in spite of being hard to work for, or with. People took it to mean that in order to be as successful as Steve Jobs, one had to be an asshole. The end result was that we had quite a few Jobs-wannabes - basically talentless assholes with big dreams and even bigger mouths.

My point is, imitation may be the highest form of flattery; but for those ill-equipped to carry out said imitation, it becomes a liability quickly.

Also, consider this: any employer who isn't comfortable with employees working remotely on an island as small as Singapore, will be significantly less comfortable with employees working remotely out of Singapore.

If your employer is threatening to stop all this WFH nonsense by hiring more WFH programmers from beyond Singapore's shores, it doesn't take a genius to understand that the math does not quite add up.

When it starts being stupid

And it's at this point, where some employers will go, "Well, I'll just skip the red tape and hire direct from Vietnam, then."

Really? You're going to bypass all the legal and pertinent protections that hiring through the proper channels brings you?

How well do you know your own local employees, much less ones you hire from overseas? Do you know their residential address? And even assuming it's a verifiable genuine address, have you ever tried to navigate Vietnam using just a residential address without any understanding of the local language and conventions?

Pray tell, if the foreign software developer whom you don't know from Adam (or Minh, or Rajasamy) decides to sell your IP to the highest bidder, introduce malware into your code base or do any manner of damaging and illegal acts for profit or simply for amusement, how well do you expect to enforce your legal rights? Remember, they're not operating in Singapore, your home turf. Unlike local employees, these are foreign developers under a different jurisdiction where legal enforcement is already significantly harder - now made even more difficult because, y'know, you so cleverly bypassed the proper channels.

That's just the most extreme cases. Let's consider some less extreme but still very real considerations.

Time zones aren't that big an issue. This being Southeast Asia, assuming the employer is not adventurous (or foolhardy) enough to hire from further abroad, the time differences are off by a couple hours at most - an hour tops in the case of Vietnam. It'll need work, but it can work.

What's arguably a bigger issue, is culture. Just because you are all presumably communicating in English does not mean you speak the same language. Nuance gets lost in translation, especially if you're speaking through a computer screen. Honestly, colleagues have enough problems just communicating face-to-face, in the same culture, in the same language.

Don't cut through
this red tape.

And the most relevant question of all: Why, in the name of all that's right and holy, would anyone put themselves in this position just to save a few thousand bucks a month? Does a company that needs to save that kind of chump change so badly, really inspire confidence in you as an employee?

Anyone old enough to run a business, is too old to be this fucking dumb.

Hiring foreigners isn't foolish inherently. Hiring foreigners remotely isn't either, though significantly riskier. Hiring foreigners remotely without going through the proper channels? Reckless, and potentially illegal. Don't do it.

Conclusion and disclaimer

This is not meant to be any kind of statement against Vietnam. Vietnam absolutely does have a wealth of tech talent at affordable prices. I've worked with quite a few. I was only using Vietnam as a convenient example. I could easily have said Myanmar or India.

My point isn't that employers shouldn't hire foreigners remotely. My point is that it's not something that can just be hand-waved. Employers who have the experience and capability to carry this out, won't be talking about it because they are already - as Nike likes to say - just doing it. Or at the very least, taking cautious first steps. And the ones who are bringing it up casually as leverage during a discussion about remote work, will in all probability continue to just talk.

Your employer is not stupid. But if he's using hiring remote foreigners as a threat, he probably really hopes you are.

Tạm biệt hẹn gặp lại,
T___T

Ten Awesome Tech Tattoos

Tattoos are a common sight in society these days. I recently saw a nice tattoo on some random middle-aged housewives, and then it hit me: it's not that housewives are suddenly finding it hip to ink their bodies. It's more like these were the rebellious teenagers from a couple decades back, now all grown up and shit. Heck, I'm no spring chicken. But that's neither here nor there.

Tech tattoos, on the other hand, should really occupy their own niche. The ones I managed to find in cyberspace are clever, quirky and just awesome.

1. Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish

We begin with a nice nod to the late great Steve Jobs. This is one of his more well-known quotes.

From IJustWanaShine.

Now I'm not a big fan and this isn't anything I would ever do. But come on, this is classy. And inspirational, to boot.

2. HTML Code

For all web devs out there, this is not just HTML code, it's a clever pun!

From Lambatest

It would actually take someone in the know to appreciate that joke; however, it's relatively easy to implement. Again, not one of those things I would totally do, but I appreciate the intent.

3. Linux Command

For those familiar with Linux, this line basically means "recursively delete all files and directories without asking for confirmation". In other words, remove everything without regret.

From louiseann93

The sentiment behind simplifying your life is one I can get behind. The fact that this dude has it inked into his forearm gave me pause. Is he saying he can remove your life with one punch?

4. Binary

This guy has his name "MIKE" tattooed in binary.

From TattooViewer

Not a bad idea, but if you had a seriously long ass name, that might present a problem.

5. 404

Nothing to see here, move along. That's the message I got.

From Pinterest

The woman in question has it on her bosom. It could be her way of saying "my eyes are up here", but it might just send a cheekier message. Like, "titsheart not found".

6. More Binary!

Ooh! Now this one is nice. Not only is it binary, it's taking the shape of one of my favorite childhood memories!

From Tattoodo

Plus, it's in monochrome. I love tats like that.

7. Paper Clip

This is another memory, albeit not quite so fond.

From
JavaScript in Plain English

If anyone ever had the misfortune of using Microsoft Word when it was featuring this annoying little mascot, they'd know what I'm talking about. It's a nice idea, but I can't see myself wanting this fella be a permanent part of me.

8. Docker

Now this is dedication. Is it a DevOps thing to ink the whale icon of Docker in their skin? That's amusing.

From Twitter

Then again, I have Liverpool FC's motto inked into my knuckles, so who am I to talk?

9. WiFi

I appreciate anyone who has the WiFi icon tattooed on them. Not that they can actually provide WiFi, but they can at least relate to its importance.

From Tattoodo

This fella has it on his middle finger. I can just imagine someone asking him for WiFi, and his response...

10. IBM

Again, dedication. This time, to a tech company. Honestly, I'm not totally behind this one. Unless you own the company in question, this just seems superfluous to me. Companies are where you work and get paid, and after you're gone from there, you're gone.

From Flickr

In addition, if I had to pick an IBM tattoo, I would not have gone for this one. I would have gone for the far cleverer rebus option. An eye, a bee and an M.

Conclusion

There you go, folks! Ten cool (and some not that cool but nevertheless thought-provoking) tech tattoos. Any strike your fancy?

I ink, therefore I am,
T___T

The Point Behind The Question

The first month of 2020 kicked off with a Parliamentary tussle when Minister Chan Chun Sing provided statistics on how employment in Singapore had increased by nearly 60,000 between 2015 and 2018. MP Pritam Singh challenged him to provide a breakdown across all industry sectors in the Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs); and furthermore, to provide breakdowns for the data between Singaporeans and Permanent Residents (PRs) because up to that point, Singaporeans and PRs had been categorized under a single group. Minister Chan responded with the following (rather defensive) rebuttal, which, incidentally, led to an amusing slew of memes around his retort "what is the point behind the question?"

"We can get you the numbers. But let me say this. What is the point behind the question? First, has local unemployment increased with all these efforts? The answer is a resounding 'no'. Our people are getting good jobs. Are our wages going up? Yes, and it's faster than many other countries. Those are proof points to show that we are doing right by Singaporeans.

But I'm always very cautious about this constant divide, Singaporean versus PR. The insinuation seems to be that somehow Singaporeans are not benefiting."

While I probably wouldn't have put it that way, I'm inclined to agree that while a breakdown would certainly provide more information, it's pedantic at best for the purposes for which this data was intended - to track how well the ITMs are doing. I assume that MP Pritam Singh was making the request out of purely academic interest, and admittedly viewing that data for the Infocomm and Media sector would be very interesting for me personally.

There is also the small matter of the other point that Minister Chan raised. Singaporean unemployment had gone down. But seeking the data in order to establish whether or not PRs were benefiting more than Singaporeans comes across as - dare I say it? - petty and small-minded.

Foreigners in the tech sector 

In certain segments of Singaporean society, there's been a fair amount of resentment towards foreigners due to the perception that they steal jobs that rightfully belong to "true-blue born and bred" Singaporeans. Hence the inclination to check if more higher-paying jobs are being occupied by foreigners than locals.

And you know what? They probably are. So what? Do people honestly imagine that these higher-paying jobs could be just as easily done exclusively by local talent? Without a certain amount of foreigners coming in to fill those positions, the global tech companies such as Facebook, Google, Amazon, IBM and Microsoft would have significantly less incentive to set up shop here. And that means the opportunities I've had for the past few years would be non-existent. I would probably still be sweating it out for cheap local bosses - you know, the kind who pay you just 3,000 SGD a month and expect your immortal soul in return.

Modern-day slavery.

Sure, I may not be earning as much as many foreigners. But I'm earning way more than I used to. Sometimes, comparing what you have now with what you used to have, makes a heck of a lot more sense than comparing it with what others have. With the former, you at least see progress. With the latter, you'll never be happy because your aspirations (what others have) will exceed your abilities (what you can get).

Simply put, I don't care who's doing better than me. I only care that I'm doing a lot better than I used to.

In my workplace 

When I tell people that I'm the only Singaporean developer in a team full of foreign developers, they're quick to jump and point to unfair hiring practices and foreigners being favored over locals, and that someone like me is being hired only to satisfy the quotas for local workers and increase the allotted quota for foreigners.

Firstly, that's rubbish. The foreigners I work with are on Employment Passes, which are not subject to foreign headcount quotas at all.

Secondly, Singaporeans have been interviewed for the job before. Exceedingly few of them made it. And if I'm an example of a Singaporean who survived that interview process, I shudder to think how shit unqualified the others must be if they didn't.

Thirdly, administration-wise, it is actually easier to hire a Singaporean than a foreigner. Employment Passes take time to get approved. And if candidates need to go through Government security screening, foreigners take roughly twice the time it takes for a local.

Lastly, of all the Singaporeans who actually got the job, very few stayed past one year. Apparently it was too much work for too little pay. I happened to have come from worse conditions; ergo I was happy to stay. Also, many Singaporeans have been conditioned to look down on contract positions and any position that has no potential for them to rise through the ranks. It helps that I've never wanted a higher-ranking post, because accepting that increase in responsibility for just a little bit more pay just never made any practical sense to me. I suspect quite a few people want those jobs not because they actually want them, but because they've been conditioned to think that they should want them. Because of "Career Progression" or some such bullshit.

So, no. In my organization's case, it's not that companies don't want to hire locals. It's more that locals are either disinterested or unqualified for my position.

Now, the Fair Consideration Framework isn't perfect, not by a long shot. But it's a heck of a lot better than nothing, which is pretty much what we had before 2013. The Government actually exceeded my expectations here. Instead of simply incentivizing companies that did adhere to the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices, they actively went after companies that tried to circumvent those rules.

Sure, there are always going to be people who deride this news, and label it Wayang. And they do have a point - it seems to be the smaller companies that bear the brunt of the investigations.

But you see, it is precisely these smaller companies that flout these regulations because they have a more intense need to. The bigger ones - the really huge ones - have too much to lose by not following the laws of the land. And they're less concerned about squeezing every drop of blood and sweat from their employees. Facebook is more interested in invading our privacy for profit. Google is more interested in tracking our every move and appearing not to be evil. As for Apple, they've got child labor in China sweatshops - quite legally too, as it happens - why would they waste time screwing over a relatively paltry number of Singaporeans on this tiny island?

So, if one of these mega-corporations doesn't want to offer you that cushy five-figure salary, it's probably not because they have any preference towards foreigners. It's more likely that you're just not good enough. These huge tech companies have very stringent acceptance criteria, and it's rarely a case of where you're from, but how qualified you are. More often than not, that describes a foreigner. And they're hardly going to break a sweat over losing prospective hires to employment regulations in Singapore, because there's an exceedingly long line of talented people who want to join their ranks.

Talent in various shapes and forms.

The other reason I want these mega-corporations around, is because I have relatively recent, very unpleasant memories of working for local employers with an exceedingly strong affliction of The Chinese Towkay Syndrome. Back then, in the tech sector, it was an employer's market and these bosses were as exploitative as they come. The presence of large multi-national tech corporations with a plethora of employee benefits and higher wages, keeps these guys honest because they're no longer the biggest or only game in town. And if this means that a big chunk of higher-paying jobs are going to foreigners, so be it.

Why employers seem to prefer foreigners 

The common misconception seems to be that foreigners are better workers - more diligent, more knowledgeable, more accommodating, more everything. And, of course, cheaper. Undoubtedly, some of them are. But that's not where their true value lies.

Foreigners are generally only able to work in Singapore if issued a pass of some sort - a Work Permit, S Pass or Employment Pass. When employment ends with an organization or the pass has expired, they have a limited time to stay in Singapore to find another employer willing to take them on. Things get complicated fast if they have family here, perhaps children studying in local schools.

Therefore, since their continued employment exists at the pleasure of their employers, foreigners are generally more obliging. Also, if they're here alone with not many family and friends, there's not much for them to do in their spare time and they're usually more than happy to take on extra work.

Eat shit, and like it.

Simply put, a foreigner will put up with demands that a local won't. They'll eat shit, and smile while they do it. Locals are far more likely to walk away if it gets too hot in the kitchen, because we can. Foreigners simply don't have that luxury.

So for those who like to complain about the lack of Home Ground Advantage, this is your Home Ground Advantage. And it's no small one. In fact, its so big that many companies would rather not deal with it. If you need proof of this, take your average docile foreigner and issue him or her PR status, and see how swiftly their attitude changes when their stay is no longer directly dependent on the goodwill of their employer.

Should the data be released to the public? 

Absolutely! Do it!

Assuming that disgruntled Singaporeans actually find evidence that more PRs are occupying higher paying jobs than Singaporeans, just what are they going to do about it? Move out of Singapore to greener pastures? If they actually had the ability to thrive elsewhere, I suspect they would have done it already, as opposed to squawking on Social Media.

Just go.

No, this is Singapore and we are a nation of Champion Grumblers. The late great Lee Kuan Yew said so himself. The Government should have faith that we'll accept the reality of the situation and get back to work. We complain excessively, of course, but when push comes to shove, we ultimately choose the most sensible and pragmatic option. Let's not ever change that.

Those that don't want to accept the reality of Globalization have the option of leaving. And they should. At the very least, it will give them a taste of what it's like to be a foreigner somewhere else and be the ones eating shit while those countries' locals complain about them for a change.

In closing 

Singaporeans are a competitive lot. We hate losing. And we especially hate losing out. That's a good thing.

However, being competitive is meaningless if we are not also competent. Aim high by all means; though if something is out of reach, better yourself in order to reach it. Demanding that the Government make things easier ("fairer") for us is one thing, but let's not abandon our responsibility for our own career development.

Does that mean I think that the noise-makers on Social Media clamoring for more transparency from the Government ought to tone it down a notch, then?

Oh heavens, no. Not a chance.

Sure, the Government's job would be a lot easier if we all simply went along like mindless sheep, but here's the thing: governance isn't meant to be easy. Anyone going into governance thinking that it's easy is under a severe delusion and needs to be disabused of it ASAP. Governance requires character of sterling quality. Running things for a few million loud complainers isn't easy... but neither is maintaining good standing and friendly relations with countless other nations with far larger populations and longer histories, some of whom have nuclear warfare capabilities. If a would-be Governor can't cope with the former, he or she has no business at all attempting the latter.

So keep holding their feet to the fire, you lovably noisy malcontents. Just don't forget to help the Government do their jobs by keeping yourselves employable. Because if all we're good for is raising a fuss on Social Media, Minister Chan Chun Sing's stated dream of locals one day taking those high-paying jobs may never come to fruition.

Pointedly,
T___T

Five Comparisons Between Contract and Permanent Roles

There was a time I harbored a deeply-rooted prejudice against contract positions. I saw them as second-class at best, expendable at worst. What self-respecting developer, I thought, would allow himself to take up a contract position? A decade later, I would be disabused of this ill-informed notion. A year or so in a contract position, coupled with several tempestuous years in permanent positions, has taught me differently. There are differences, of course, but these differences are neither good or bad; it all depends on the context.

1. Job Stability

There's this myth going around that contract positions are inherently less stable than permanent roles. That's true on the surface, but being professionals and all, let's try to look deeper.

Unstable?

The typical contract's duration runs from six months to a year. During this time, while theoretically the company reserves the right to terminate employment at any time, most employers are notably reluctant to do so without good cause. ("Good cause", in this case, means a serious breach of professional ethics or extreme negligence, which is grounds for immediate termination regardless of whether you're a contractor or permanent staff.) Thus, if they think you're underperforming and want to get rid of you, all they need to do is wait out your contract's duration and at its conclusion, inform you that it will not be renewed. However, there is no such option in the case of permanent employees. Therefore, the only other recourse is to fire you, or make your position so untenable that you voluntarily resign.

Job stability? Job security? It's all an illusion. The only job security you can realistically have is what you make for yourself. If you understand and have what your industry needs, it won't matter if you're employed; you'll be able to get out there and land a job just like that. That's security. Anything else is bullshit.

Also, consider this. The typical software project is transient in nature. It runs for an allotted time, and once it's done, the company needs to find work for the permanent staff member in order to justify his stay. For the contractor, there is no such problem. He simply sticks around for maintenance until his contract is up, and then he leaves. No fuss, no muss! At an interview, hiring Managers get suspicious if they see that the applicant has not been in any company more than a couple years. They will ask no such questions of the contractor because they understand that this is the nature of contracts, i.e, they run out when the project is completed.

2. Career Progression

As a contractor, you are outside of the company's corporate structure. Therefore, there is no meaningful way to promote you. The best you could hope for would be some unofficially senior status.

That's true enough, no argument there. Where I differ from many people is whether or not that is a bad thing.

You're not part of this game.

You see, the entire point is about being outside the company's corporate structure. This basically means that you're probably going to be excluded from all the office politics going on within the corporate structure. That's because, being a contractor, you're not a pawn. Hell, you're not even on the chessboard!

I've been in a permanent role before, where my colleague took every opportunity to upstage me and look good at my expense. That was because she needed to look good to the higher-ups. There was a vacancy in Management and she wanted that promotion. (Spoiler: She did get promoted. I don't think she enjoyed it much.) Years later, I am a contractor surrounded by other contractors. None of us waste time with silly games of one-upmanship. I don't have to be afraid of being stabbed in the back or of people scoring cheap political points off me. Because there's no promotion up for grabs, or even a possibility for conversion to permanent status. We are all contractors and we will remain contractors no matter how good we look. There is nothing to gain.

Besides, just because you don't get a fancy job title and a huge paycheck, does not mean that there is no career progress. I'll expand on this point another day, but career progress in tech should be measured by the value of the work you produce.  Anyone clueless enough to measure your career progress by what's printed on your business card, probably doesn't have anything meaningful to add to the conversation.

3. Benefits

Contractors don't get as many benefits as permanent staff. On the flip side, they do generally get paid more, since these benefits cost the company money, money that the company does not have to spend on the contractor. Again, whether or not that is a good thing depends largely on what you need.

More vacation days.

More annual leave? What would I do with it? I spent most of my time in the swimming pool or library anyway.

More sick days? You're talking to a guy who once went a stretch of eight years without needing to take a single sick day.

Insurance? What, you don't have your own insurance policy and need the company's coverage? Something's not right here.

Training? You actually depend on your company to provide you with training? What is wrong with you?!

Bonuses? Here's a sobering fact, my friend: ever since the Singapore Government mandated that the annual bonus is entirely at the company's discretion, several SMEs, all at the same time or thereabouts, declared themselves too cash-strapped to pay bonuses. Annual bonuses either shrunk drastically or outright disappeared. And in many cases, they never came back.

Also, there's the question of how much one really needs a year-end bonus.

Sure, a sum of money at the end of the work year is nice to have. But I don't need it. Without it, I'm not going to starve or even be mildly inconvenienced. I barely spend a quarter of what I make, and at the end of the year there's always enough money for Christmas treats for the family and insurance payments. You know about monthly bills? Those things that arrive in your mailbox more regularly than the typical menstrual cycle? There's an awfully good reason why they're called "monthly bills" - they arrive monthly. Not once a year. If you live your life in such a way that you're held hostage by the availability of a year-end bonus, the problem is not the bonus.

Besides, I've worked for companies in a permanent role, where I got ten days of annual leave a year and no bonus. To hell with the supposed benefits for permanent staff. Just give me my contractor pay.

4. Prestige

The common perception is that contractors are contractors only because they're not good enough to be permanent staff. I can see why people would think that way- I used to, once!

The bar isn't lowered.

However, the entry requirements for permanent staff remain the same for contractors. Contract positions are not some kind of consolation prize for failing to land a permanent role. The bar doesn't get lowered for contract positions. If you're not good enough for a permanent role, you won't be good enough for contract work either. (Let's not talk about companies that put people in contract roles with the promise of a conversion to permanent status if they perform well enough. Those are tactics by desperate employers, meant for desperate employees. Pro tip: Don't be desperate.)

The fact is that contractors will be exposed to several different technological stacks due to working in different companies and different projects. That could be an enormous advantage, depending on who's hiring. The permanent staff member has no such luck; he has to stick around and work on the same technological stack for years - and if that ever gets deprecated, he's utterly screwed.

Also, major tech companies like Facebook and Google now have contractors as the majority of their workforce. That's the way the industry is swinging, and that reality is reflected in the way hiring Managers look at your resume. Contract positions are now an accepted norm rather than the exception.

At the end of the day, the company you're in matters more than whether it's a contract or permanent position. Being a contractor in a tech giant like IBM, for example, is objectively better for your resume than being permanent staff in some tiny, no-name operation.

5. Administration

Typically, a contractor needs to fill in and submit timesheets in order to get paid. That's annoying as all heck - any developer worth his salt would much rather be writing code - but I guess you could get used to it eventually. I know, after everything I've said so far, this is a minor inconvenience, at best.

That damn timesheet.

Still, compare it to the sheer pleasantness of having your bank balance credited without having to lift a finger if you're in a permanent role.

Conclusion

Would I take up another contract position? Yes, in a heartbeat.

Sure, all things being equal, I'd still choose a permanent position over a contract. Because I'm getting a bit too old to be running around job-hunting every couple years . But my disdain towards contract positions has all but melted away. I've come to see that contract positions hold a certain niche in the tech landscape, and it isn't going away anytime soon; rather, it looks to be growing. A tech professional could still ignore this option, of course... but keep an open mind. The day may come where a contract position looks like an attractive course of action. If you're ten to twenty years younger than me, you might want to give it a shot. What have you got to lose? You're early in your career, you're still making up your mind and finding your feet... may as well make it look legit.

As with all things, ignore what others have and stop being obsessed with "not losing out". Context matters. Consider your own needs and working style instead, and then decide what suits you, not other people, best.

Take up a contract. Expand your world. (heh heh)
T___T

Where To Find Work (Part 2/3)

When we talk about tech companies, names like Google, Microsoft and IBM come to mind. But tech companies cover a wide range - from infrastructure to software. They also come in a large variety of sizes and service models. It's best to examine your planned career path and make your decisions based on those.

Tech Start-up

Companies that have yet to turn a profit or arrive at any kind of critical mass.

Company Size. These are typically really small, numbering less than ten employees, though large startups (such as Uber) aren't unheard of. We're, at this moment, speaking of the really tiny operations.

Service Model. B2B or B2C.

Pros

Experience. If you're starting out in your career, this is an excellent way to get your feet wet. The ungodly working hours and the tendency of the employer to throw everything your way will ensure that - as long as your attitude remains positive. Also, mentioning that you've survived "startup culture" is almost always a positive with potential employers. If nothing else, you've proven you can weather storms.

Importance. Companies like to say "everyone is important in our organization". This is bullshit. There's always dead weight in corporations above a certain size. But in a tiny startup, this is true because there's no way for it to be false. Every person actually matters. It's a minimal headcount. This is a huge chance to make a difference.

Sauntering to
work like this!

Informal. There's little to no red tape because it's more trouble than it's worth at this point. Sure, there are rules... but also a great amount of flexibility. If you need to take urgent leave or even just a couple hours off, there's generally little to no paperwork and the approving party is more amenable to it. And the lack of a dress code basically means you can waltz in rocking your shorts and slippers every damn day.

Cons

Pay and benefits. Typically not great. It's a startup and they're surviving on raised funds. This means belt are always tightened.

Environment. Along with belts being tightened, being in a startup also typically means that your office is going to look like somebody's storeroom.

Workload. If you're a fan of coming in on time and leaving on time, don't count on it with a startup. Here, due to lack of manpower, everyone gives way more than the prescribed eight working hours a day, bosses included. Working in a startup is hell for your work-life-balance.

Stability. Or lack thereof. A company that is in danger of going under anytime due to lack of funding, isn't the safest bet in the world. You've been warned.

Verdict. Try this at least once in your career. Especially early in your career. If the start-up fails, you'd have gained valuable experience. If it succeeds (and that's a tremendous if) you can take a healthy chunk of credit for bringing it past startup stage. Either way - much to gain, fuck-all to lose.

Software Vendor

These are small companies that make software or websites for other companies. They may have gotten past the startup phase, but survival is a constant struggle.

Company Size. Small or medium.

Service Model. B2B

Pros

Responsibility. Everyone manages clients and builds software at the same time. This is really good for leveling up different aspects of your game simultaneously.

Informal. There are rules. Those rules are also negotiable, because at this point, the company hasn't grown large enough that making occasional exceptions on a case-by-case basis would pose any sizeable problem. That said, it really depends on who's in charge. Some SMEs have a serious case of Chinese Towkay Syndrome and like to act like they have a few thousand employees under them.

Domain Knowledge. Doing work for several different clients, all from different industries and backgrounds, can make the developer well-versed in a large variety of industries. This is always useful, particularly in the event that you want to consider being a software developer in that particular industry.

Direct contribution to profits. Since the profits come off doing lots of low-margin work, your value is determined by how many clients you manage to bill on your watch regularly.

Cons

Repetitive work. Doing different versions of the same thing day in, day out, can make you feel like you're stuck in a Hamster Wheel of Doom.

Standard of work. By that same token, doing work for so many clients invariably means that the projects are small. And simple. Things you'll eventually outgrow.

Pay. The pay is not that much better than that of a startup. The company can pay more, but you have to constantly prove yourself because your performance is directly linked to profits. This can prove exhausting in the long run.

Like a very leaky boat at sea.

Stability. They're more stable than the average startup, which doesn't mean much. A bit of upheaval in the tides of the economy will see them scramble to cut the dead weight.

Verdict

A decent (but entirely optional) training choice early or in the middle of your career. Don't stay beyond a few years. Get the experience you need and move on.

Tech Multinational Company

These are typically the big players whose head office is often not in Singapore.

Company Size. Large. Sometimes huge.

Service Model. B2B or B2C.

Pros

A great environment.

Environment. Big spaces, janitorial services, posh business locations.

Pay and benefits. Your remuneration is likely to be competitive. You may even get dental.

Professional visibility. Google. Facebook. Microsoft. These ring a bell? They should, because they're B2C and just about everyone has heard of them. If they're purely B2B, like Cloudflare or Atlassian, then maybe not. But those in the tech industry would have heard of them, and that's no small thing. Working in a tech MNC opens new doors.

Stability. Big tech companies tend to be big for a reason. They've weathered storms, and in all likelihood, will probably be around long after you're gone.

Cons

Politics. At any large corporation, you get people jostling for position and all that juvenile shit.

Your expendibility. Again, in a large company, your contribution doesn't have as much impact. Their attitude is more along the lines of "you're lucky to be working for us" rather than "we're lucky to have you on board". There are small companies with the same attitude; then again, we aren't talking about those wannabes, are we?

Red tape. A company of that size doesn't have the luxury of making exceptions for extenuating circumstances. Everything will be strictly by the book, unless you're personally very important to the organization.

Verdict

Move on when the time is right, but this makes a great addition to any resume. If you do decide to stay for the long haul, there's always the chance of a promotion and increased benefits.

Next

Now for the non-tech companies...