twesterm said:
Dragon_Lord said:
twesterm said:
Dragon_Lord said:
twesterm said:
Dragon_Lord said:
I don't get these companies strategy wouldn't it be cheaper to hire more people and not pay anyone overtime? |
No, read about the Mythical Man Month as to why.
Essentially, it boils down to one woman can make a baby in nine months but three woman cannot make a baby in three months. Adding more people does not always get things done quicker because some things depend on others. You could have 1000 people working on a project but if you only have the bandwidth for 100 people then you have 900 people twiddling their thumbs.
|
You can hire 300 people and have work being done 24/7 with 3 8 hour shifts
|
Not really because adding multiple hands on a single item can (and will) also increase time.
Really, just read the link.
|
If they actually paid overtime which I'm pretty sure they are legally obigated in some places, it would be more then the increased time
|
You misunderstand what I'm saying-- it might take one person 8 hours to finish one work item. It's flawed thinking that two people will take four hours because that's ignoring the fact that the two people will work different and there's time involved in transferring the work from one person to the next.
One more time-- read the link.
Piling people onto a project does not always help.
|
it doesn't increase the time that much time, maybe 1 extra hour every 8 at most, far less then overtime payout would be get some common sense, it seems to me the only reason they make people work those hours is because they get away with not paying them
