Bonus for engineers, is that done?

[Tom Gardner]

On 25/01/20 01:04, Piotr Wyderski wrote:

Clifford Heath wrote:

To such an engineer, money is not a motivation, so much as inadequate pay
is a demotivation. Money matters, but only if there's not enough.

I beg to disagree, the purpose of a job is to make money. You basically sell
your time, of which you have limited amount, so you are interested in
selling it at the highest price you can get.

Not for me. I once had a job offer that I declined twice
despite the salary being increased 25%, and I accepted
an offer for less than that. I never regretted that decision.

True, this is not the only factor that matters, but one of critical
importance.

Only up to a point.

For many engineers salary is one of Herzberg's "hygiene
factors" rather than a "motivator".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-factor_theory

Hygiene factors (e.g. status, job security, salary,
fringe benefits, work conditions, good pay, paid
insurance, vacations) that do not give positive
satisfaction or lead to higher motivation, though
dissatisfaction results from their absence.

Motivators (e.g. challenging work, recognition for
one's achievement, responsibility, opportunity to
do something meaningful, involvement in decision
making, sense of importance to an organization) that
give positive satisfaction, arising from intrinsic
conditions of the job itself, such as recognition,
achievement, or personal growth.

CEOs greed is based on salary being a motivator for
them.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 25/01/20 00:26, Piotr Wyderski wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

As a customer I don't care if you enjoy your job or hate it.

But I care. I don't want to be told exactly what to do, by people who
often don't know themselves. I want to understand the customer's
systems and problems and make suggestions.

I have never said that you are not allowed to prepare the specification
together with the customer in a way you like, or not have any other form of
activity you consider fun. But later failing to provide a product that meets the
agreed specification is exactly that -- a failure, which makes all the fun
irrelevant. I just claim that if the engineer succeeded, but is unable to sell
as much as the company wishes, it's not his fault. Blame your sales team or any
other employee that is supposed to sell.

The flip side of that would be "if the salesman succeeded,
but the engineer is unable to create what the salesman sold,
it's not the salesman's fault".

That shouldn't happen, but it does.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 25/01/20 00:43, Piotr Wyderski wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:

The key point of a successful relationship of any
sort is that you try to understand what the other
party needs, and try to supply it.

In a professional role that means you understand
the value that your customers give /their/ customers.

That's exactly what we have in our company and is pretty typical here.
We have full-time analysts that work together with a client and try to
extract as much information as possible. Our engineers digest that and
tell the analysts the next batch of questions to ask, be they technical
or legal. On top of that there is a dedicated sales team that makes sure
the process goes smoothly.

But nobody in their right mind would punish an engineer for a sale opportunity
failure or a salesman for a solution that does not work as advertised.

I've seen salesmen assure the customer that the product will,
in effect, can safely ignore one or more of the fallacies
of distributed computing, or that it has solved the Byzantine
general's problem.

It becomes a colossal waste of time for engineers to have to
unwind/correct such idiocies.

Engineers being in the loop at each end helps avoid that. When
that happens it is merely a matter of taste as to whether all
the engineers and salesmen can sit around a table together.

The very
next day they would be working for our competitors. There are designated
employees to handle all the aspects of the process correctly, blame them -- this
is a serious and heavily regulated business, not a one man show.

Not all businesses are like that.

 

[Piotr Wyderski]

Tom Gardner wrote:

The flip side of that would be "if the salesman succeeded,
but the engineer is unable to create what the salesman sold,
it's not the salesman's fault".

That shouldn't happen, but it does.

This is "business as usual." :>

Best regards, Piotr

 

[Piotr Wyderski]

Tom Gardner wrote:

I've seen salesmen assure the customer that the product will,
in effect, can safely ignore one or more of the fallacies
of distributed computing, or that it has solved the Byzantine
general's problem.

It becomes a colossal waste of time for engineers to have to
unwind/correct such idiocies.

https://www.computerworld.com/article/2556725/united-axes-troubled-baggage-system-at-denver-airport.html

Mere 230e6 USD of wasted money, try to beat that.

Engineers being in the loop at each end helps avoid that. When
that happens it is merely a matter of taste as to whether all
the engineers and salesmen can sit around a table together.

This loop is vital and involved more parties than sales/engineers,
however letting the engineers talk to the client directly might have...
interesting consequences, to say the least. Some mid-air transcoding is
necessary not to insult people, as well as translating "blah, blah, balh
aaaand blah!" into "yes"/"no" edible by technical folks. :->

> Not all businesses are like that.

Surely, but neither is John's. Our world has fabulous capacitance and
can easily host various approaches.

Best regards, Piotr

 

[Rick C]

On Saturday, January 25, 2020 at 6:44:26 AM UTC-5, Piotr Wyderski wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:

I've seen salesmen assure the customer that the product will,
in effect, can safely ignore one or more of the fallacies
of distributed computing, or that it has solved the Byzantine
general's problem.

It becomes a colossal waste of time for engineers to have to
unwind/correct such idiocies.

https://www.computerworld.com/article/2556725/united-axes-troubled-baggage-system-at-denver-airport.html

Mere 230e6 USD of wasted money, try to beat that.

They should have asked Forth Inc. to rewrite the software. They did this once for American Airlines in a similar situation. Worked great. It is often touted as an example of what can be done with a unique tool and approach.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 25/01/20 11:44, Piotr Wyderski wrote:

Tom Gardner wrote:

I've seen salesmen assure the customer that the product will,
in effect, can safely ignore one or more of the fallacies
of distributed computing, or that it has solved the Byzantine
general's problem.

It becomes a colossal waste of time for engineers to have to
unwind/correct such idiocies.

https://www.computerworld.com/article/2556725/united-axes-troubled-baggage-system-at-denver-airport.html


Mere 230e6 USD of wasted money, try to beat that.

I remember that being covered pretty comprehensively
on comp.risks
from 1994 https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/15/68#subj2.1
to 1996 https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/17/61#subj2.1
with amusingly https://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/18/66#subj5.1

The January 1997 issue of "Dr. Dobbs Journal" has an article in which the
author reports that his software simulation of the automatic baggage
handling system of the Denver airport mimicked the real-life situation.

In his conclusion, he notes that the consultants did perform a similar
simulation and had recommended against the installation of the system
currently in place. The city, however, overruled the consultant's report
(the contractors who were building the system never did see the report) and
gave the go-ahead.

Engineers being in the loop at each end helps avoid that. When
that happens it is merely a matter of taste as to whether all
the engineers and salesmen can sit around a table together.

This loop is vital and involved more parties than sales/engineers, however
letting the engineers talk to the client directly might have... interesting
consequences, to say the least. Some mid-air transcoding is necessary not to
insult people, as well as translating "blah, blah, balh aaaand blah!" into
"yes"/"no" edible by technical folks. :-

Gaining a common language and understanding isn't easy,
but is essential.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 02:04:14 +0100, Piotr Wyderski
<peter.pan@neverland.mil> wrote:

Clifford Heath wrote:

To such an engineer, money is not a motivation, so much as inadequate
pay is a demotivation. Money matters, but only if there's not enough.

I beg to disagree, the purpose of a job is to make money. You basically
sell your time, of which you have limited amount, so you are interested
in selling it at the highest price you can get. True, this is not the
only factor that matters, but one of critical importance.

So become a lawyer, or a prostitute, or a bank robber. Or go for the
big bucks and become a politician.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[George Herold]

On Monday, January 27, 2020 at 3:16:16 PM UTC-5, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 02:04:14 +0100, Piotr Wyderski
peter.pan@neverland.mil> wrote:

Clifford Heath wrote:

To such an engineer, money is not a motivation, so much as inadequate
pay is a demotivation. Money matters, but only if there's not enough.

I beg to disagree, the purpose of a job is to make money. You basically
sell your time, of which you have limited amount, so you are interested
in selling it at the highest price you can get. True, this is not the
only factor that matters, but one of critical importance.


So become a lawyer, or a prostitute, or a bank robber. Or go for the
big bucks and become a politician.

Yup, the purpose is to have fun. And figure out how to make
enough money to live doing it. (And there's also this
assumption that I'm worth more when I'm having fun.)

George H.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Tuesday, January 28, 2020 at 7:16:16 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jan 2020 02:04:14 +0100, Piotr Wyderski
peter.pan@neverland.mil> wrote:

Clifford Heath wrote:

To such an engineer, money is not a motivation, so much as inadequate
pay is a demotivation. Money matters, but only if there's not enough.

I beg to disagree, the purpose of a job is to make money. You basically
sell your time, of which you have limited amount, so you are interested
in selling it at the highest price you can get. True, this is not the
only factor that matters, but one of critical importance.

So become a lawyer, or a prostitute, or a bank robber. Or go for the
big bucks and become a politician.

None of those professions offers a particularly a high rate of pay to average or typical lawyers, prostitutes or politicians.

If you have an exaggerated idea of your own competence or sex appeal you might go for them and get a depressing reality check.

The first step in selecting a line of business is finding out what you are good at. John Larkin seems to have decide that he was good at electronics early on, but his first two attempts to make money out of it didn't go well.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Kevin Aylward]

On Tuesday, 21 January 2020 23:48:23 UTC, Klaus Kragelund wrote:

Let’s say you’re a standard paid engineer

Let’s say you put in an extraordinarily effort and saves your company +20 million dollars per year

A sales guy would be getting an enormous bonus, but are there any examples of engineers getting a percentage of the savings?

I know consulting firm do it like no cure no pay, but does it happen for employed engineers?

Regards

Klaus

Yes...

Some get a few % of sales.... as in $500,000 per year....

Bonuses for functional asics back from fab etc…

http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/components/analogue-and-discretes/good-analogue-design-is-key-to-success-says-intersil-2006-06/

 

[Kevin Aylward]

On Saturday, 25 January 2020 01:18:28 UTC, Piotr Wyderski wrote:

jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

I hate
watersports.

Best regards, Piotr

Indeed. Its sticky and smells....