CEO of TopCoder, Jack Hughes has created a business model
where any programmer in the world can compete for ratings, bragging rights and
most importantly, money. Most programmers are concerned with paying bills and
increasing wealth, more so than ratings and bragging rights. This is confirmed
by Justin Gasper, a TopCoder member who competes full-time and averages over
$100,000 a year in prize money. Gasper explains that ‘winning and making money
meant more to him than ratings.’ Hughes understands this need for financial
incentives to drive programmers to its platform. The problem is that beginner
and intermediate programmers often find that top programmers like Gasper take
most of the prize money most of the time. This leaves little incentive for
beginner and intermediate coders to devote their time when it has been
established that they will likely not be winning any prizes. Instead they will
seek full-time work, where they can have some training and more reliable
economic security.
In order for TopCoder to meet industry demand for
programmers they must make contestants feel that spending their time competing
is more valuable than doing something else. Developing nations that are experiencing
hyper-inflation and depressed economies will have increasing numbers of long-term
unemployed. Those with burgeoning programming skills will find their time well
spent gaining knowledge and winning smaller prizes in TopCoder contests.
Membership growth in developed countries like the U.S. where
unemployment is low is more reliant on people taking an interest in coding at
an early age. This is when they have little or no financial obligations and can
devote more time to growing their skills and participating in these kinds of
contests with little worry of lost time. Older and more experienced programmers
are interested in more stable income that comes from full-time work. When they
have free-time they generally want to use it doing something besides coding
which they already do 40 hours a week. Relying on up-and-coming programmers to
fill TopCoder’s needs will be partially dependent on public policy and
government spending in schools. This brings the 2016 election front and center
as we consider which candidates will take a stand to spend more appropriately
on U.S. schools and programs that help fill the high skilled jobs in our
economy.
CEO Jack Hughes envisioned
his company as a place where a growing community of diverse and competitive
programmers would continually vie for top honors and a little bit of money. Instead his company has become a
part-time placement firm, matching programmers and the companies seeking
them. Highly experienced programmers like Justin Gasper have been recruited for
contract work regularly. He has not taken a full-time job because he can make
more in TopCoder competitions in the comfort of his home. Programmers like
Gasper have no incentive to take on the role of mentor to new TopCoder members.
Only CEO Jack Hughes can provide that incentive.
I really liked your argument on how difficult it is to get beginning or intermediate coder’s to want to participate in such contests TopCoder puts on since advanced coder’s, such as Justin Gasper, are continuously winning. When contemplating just how TopCoder will be able to create programmer supply from their project demand I looked at it from more of a sales point.
ReplyDeleteMike Morris, VP of Sales, feels that ‘if sales grow at a linear rate, membership grows at an exponential rate. The supply of community members is not going to limit growth. If you throw enough money out there, you will get enough programmers’. Meaning Morris thinks no matter what the competition landscape is, if you give coder’s a big enough incentive, no matter the skill level, they will continue to compete in TopCoder contests. From a sales point of view this makes all the sense in the world, but I think Morris is forgetting the different skill levels coder’s have and if coder’s really value a big paycheck once in a while over job security.
Paweska, a community member, also brought up a great point that if you increase the number of contests a week it will increase the amount of inexperienced competitors, which will in turn decrease the quality of code. It really is a double-edged sword for TopCoder to consider. On the one hand offering up more money will continue to give them a steady stream of programmers, but if you were to increase the frequency of contests that might affect the quality of code being produced.
After taking into account the coder’s, the CEO’s, and the sales team’s views I would have to doubt the idea that project demand will automatically create programmer supply. With so many factors from different parties it is hard to think that such a simple solution will be effective. If TopCoder is able to offer more money, and change the stigma of having no job security maybe programmer supply will become more automatic. For some coder’s TopCoder is the perfect place to compete for work, but others might not enjoy the contests as much. TopCoder just needs to hone in on the correct target market that would be interested in competing in their contests to properly keep up with project demand.
The incentive for intermediate software coders to begin in this business is troubling. Although one would wish to spend their time doing something they love to earn money, TopCoder still has to overcome this issue by modifying the current competitive-based software development approach.
ReplyDeleteThe competitive software approach isn't wrong, however, TopCoder doesn't give those diligently expending their time compensation for daily need payments. Regardless of the nation one resides in, equal gains will have to be agreed upon for these business actions to continue. Universally, countries will need to enact a form of net neutrality covering income.
You seem to say that "the incentive...is troubling" so TC has to modify the current competitive-based software, while at the same time saying, "The competitive software approach isn't wrong." Provide more detail here.
DeleteThere is an interesting YouTube video that discusses what motivates us. In studies done across the globe, economist, psychologists, and sociologists found that the higher the reward, for tasks that require rudimentary cognitive skill, actually result in poorer performance.
ReplyDeleteThere are 3 factors that lead to better performance: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose. Autonomy is the desire to be self-directed and mastery is the urge to get better. Studies have shown that when developers are able to create on their own without an incentive, they create more quality results. Studies have also shown that people are incentivized by their own want to get better. Many developers produce and then give that product away for free. Wikipedia, Apache, and Linux are all examples.
TopCoder can provide autonomy for the developers entering a contest; the developers are actively seeking that freedom out. And, I wouldn't doubt that many of these developers are looking to gain some mastery through the competitions.
I provided the link to the video below. It poses questions for TopCoder in the best way to motivate returning and new developers.
https://youtu.be/u6XAPnuFjJc
https://youtu.be/u6XAPnuFjJc. Good example!
ReplyDelete