![]() ![]() ![]() Again, less about the dollars here, and more about the agreement, risk, required disclosures (subprocessor, etc), and those kinds of factors. Probably want legal's eyes on it to get the right terms in place as well. With SaaS tools in particular, there are often privacy or security concerns. In this case, it's not the dollars as much as the fit. Adding to the tech stack has maintenance costs, and you don't really want to do it without some sort of review. Reviewing purchases should put some reasonable controls around how much software you can accumulate. (If you’re going to make every developer file an expense report every month, I can readily prefer to do a lot of command line typing rather than filing an expense report… If I automate that for a lot of my fellow devs, I get to do something fun and be a minor folk hero.) If you’re going to exceed that, you might as well exceed it by a lot. If you’re selling to an enterprise, don’t charge just above whatever the “employees can put it on their card without approval”. It’s not just the $250/yr/dev, but rather the requirements to create a new vendor in the ERP morass, to get approvals for an exception to the standards for payment terms (and/or methods), any requirements for vetting vendors, etc. The latter doesn't scale, though, which is why large organizations invariably regress to the former.Ī lot of the driver here is not in the moment short-sightedness, but rather a byproduct of the procurement or other finance processes (ironically often instituted with intent to prevent waste and fraud or make the company more efficient). The solution is either 1) requiring permission beforehand, or 2) hiring more mature employees who understand the nature of the dilemma and who have already factored this responsibility and risk into their negotiated compensation. The dilemma is that unless the purchaser faces some risk of incurring the expense themself, they're not as incentivized to consider the reasonableness of the purchase. I decided long ago not to worry about such expenses because 1) the engineer in me hates this inefficiency and urges me to fix or work around it (depending on your perspective), 2) navigating bureaucratic red tape takes a personal toll, and as someone who is paid well I don't mind at all spending a trivial amount of money for my own wellbeing, even if its for work, and 3) as someone who has worked in startups and even founded one, I've both been in a position where I was expected to take on such expenses and expected others to do the same (at least as an initial matter). It's the nature of large organizations-they trade efficiencies in some areas for inefficiencies in others. The problem is that there's simply no easy fix for these bureaucratic frictions and sub-optimal equilibriums. When you get a new hire, do you tell them to submit a ticket with licensing and wait until they can get their Docker Desktop license? Or do you simply write some documentation about how to accomplish tasks without using Docker Desktop so you can remove another external dependency? Teams generally gravitate toward the latter. I'm not sure I see that with Docker Desktop, though. When the tool isn't easily replaceable, you deal with it. Soon, all of those "cheap" tools have added up to $1000/month or more per employee with a couple people dedicated to managing these licenses and negotiating with vendors all of the time. The sales people know how this works and would prefer to wear you down with endless conference calls until you get tired of negotiating and just pay the new, higher price they're asking. It's not bad when it's just a couple key pieces of software, but it doesn't take long before every engineer has some mix of 20 different subscription tools and platforms and licenses and you're on the phone with a different vendor every week doing the annual subscription renewal pricing negotiation dance. Every new employee or team change requires some juggling of licenses with associated turn-around times before that person can get started. $21 per month per employee is now $252/year per employee, but now you also need someone managing all of these licenses and accounting. It works well for a while, but eventually everyone accumulates a lot of random recurring charges and the company cracks down. I've been fortunate enough to work at companies where engineers were trusted to make small purchasing decisions. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |