Should I hire a junior, middle or senior?

We are sure that almost every IT company faced this kind of a question. Some prefer to work only with experienced specialists, while others, on the contrary, rely on beginners. Therefore, we decided to consider the pros and cons of different ways to go, and at the end of the article we share non-obvious conclusions on the topic.

What’s wrong with the juniors?

Resistance to hiring juniors in most cases is due to lack of experience and the time and money needed to spend on training them. Moreover, quite often such employees expect a salary increase or begin to look for more profitable positions after the first progress.

On the other hand, for routine tasks, experience is not that important, and juniors can cope with them by working according to instructions. Their cost is low, and some of them really value quality experience in their field. And with a well-built loyalty system, a homegrown specialist may stay in the company. And yet, practice shows that the life cycle of a junior specialist in a company is 6-12 months, but the return on investments usually occurs later.

Why senior is not always the best choice

In case of seniors, the benefit seems obvious. You get a ready to use specialist on a team of who brings all his experience with him. However, a new person in any position needs a lot of time to integrate into the project, master the processes and get used to the team. At the same time, juniors take up their positions with a real burst of energy and interest, ready to adapt to the existing workflow in the company. With seniors it’s exactly the opposite. If a junior specialist approaches implementation in a project with openness and flexibility, seniors often approach it with skepticism, estimating everything based on the past experience. Their cost is significantly higher, but the life cycle is about the same – about 12 months. Therefore, sometimes the benefits from seniors are dubious.

Middle level is the golden mean?

Middles are truly the best choice with minimal risks. They already have experience, and other things being equal, the cost of such specialists is lower on average. In addition, their life cycle in the company is 12–18 months.

Outstaffing – a solution with maximum benefit

And here comes an unexpected turn. Why not expand your company capabilities – hire seasoned specialists in the outstaffing format. The base of such teams are middle level specialists, who are highly motivated to gain experience. And outstaffing is the best option for them to gain extensive experience working with different technologies and teams in a relatively short period of time. Thanks to this motivation, outstaff specialists retain enthusiasm, openness and flexibility to work. In addition, they always have senior comrades who help with solving complex problems. As well as managers who control processes and deadlines. It is beneficial for a company when the developer is as efficient as possible on the customer`s project – this is a big advantage of outstaffing.

Usually, companies are stopped by two factors: the cost of outstaffing and the desire to grow full-time specialists. However, it is incorrect to compare only the salary of a full-time specialist and the payment for an external specialist. When performing the calculations, it is also important to take into account the costs of getting and retaining a full-time employee, taxes, indirect costs, equipment, losses for missed deadlines, and much more. In addition, the salaries of different employees in the same position within the company can differ significantly. If we take into account all the factors that affect costs, then outstaffing is often a more profitable option.

And if you also consider that outstaff developers stay in a project for more than 12 months on average, and full-time employees can leave the company after just 6 months, then the idea of growing your own developer does not seem so attractive any more.

Ваck to section