slavb18

    Dear CEO / CTO: You don't have a hiring problem, you have a payroll problem

    IT
    Business
    Strategy
    Leadership

    Dear CEO / CTO,

    you don't have a hiring problem.

    You have a payroll problem.


    You're paying:

    • for time, not for results
    • for “busyness”, not for value
    • for presence, not for delivery

    And the most expensive thing - you're paying for idle time.

    The team is there. Salaries are being paid. But there are no results.


    The classic in-house model:

    • fixed payroll
    • low workload manageability
    • zero elasticity
    • risks are on the business, not on the performer

    Simply put:

    you take all the risks upon yourself.


    Now, a question.

    Why aren't you paying for results?


    There's another model:

    an external scope-sensitive team.

    What does this mean:

    • payment is tied to deliverables
    • workload scales with the task
    • SLAs and metrics are fixed
    • risk is partially on the performer

    The difference is simple:

    In-house → “we'll try” External team → “we are responsible for the results”


    The most unpleasant part:

    most companies already understand that their payroll is inefficient.

    But they continue to defend it.

    Because:

    “it's more familiar” “it's safer” “everyone does it this way”


    Spoiler:

    it's not safer.

    It's just more expensive and slower.


    If tomorrow you need to cut costs by 30% without losing speed -

    you won't be able to do it with an in-house team.

    But you can with a results-based payment model.


    The question isn't whether you need an in-house team.

    The question is different:

    what part of your payroll is actually idle time?


    📚 Read also