Title is overgeneralizing. A lot depends on how teams and communication are set up.
I have had success in outsourcing QA. The key is to either have people onshore who can communicate with them over phones or someone offshore who is a good communicator and have him/her explain things in person.
>Matthew/Chicago: I think I’m in the Twilight Zone.
Can't 'Matt' fathom that his message might be confusing to a non-native speaker? Couldn't he have put it in plain words before just firing someone over IM in a rage?
There is a proper way to 'let go' of people even if you think they are morons. Maybe it was a show-off to the '20 very concerned UAW workers' in the room?
'Hey, looks like we failed at outsourcing properly, but I just fired the guy responsible for this mess. That should make it okay, right?'
After the guy admits that he simply ignored failed tests and marked the QA as passed, I think the time for kind and easy to understand communication is long past.
It looked to me like he just misunderstood the question. He shouldn't be answering "Yes" when he doesn't understand, of course, but I don't think he was admitting to fraud or dishonesty.
Yes. That's one of the reasons I don't think this person had anything to do with defrauding the client by falsifying or skipping tests. They're not even smart (or English-literate) enough to lie about it.
The problem with outsourcing is always the fact that you get this idea of people with at least decent knowledge of X language and more times than not it blows up in everyones face when it just isn't the case. I don't care if he doesn't understand, if he has to deal with people speaking english/spanish/russian/whatever he HAS to have a decent grasp at the language (or he shouldn't be doing that line of work).
You're saying that this Matt person should have had a person that could be able to speak baby language to communicate effectively? He shouldn't have to do that at all. What's the point in outsourcing if you need people that speak baby language to communicate effectively? Matt took control of the situation and I think he was quite civil in firing that dude. I know more than one manager whom would have snapped big time at such stupidity.
Aside I've been in this same position with a three different development teams in India. Awful experience. I'm not saying there are no capable people in India, there are boatloads of great people in India, but sadly with 1.2 billion people your chances of stumbling into one of this awesome people are slimmer than Kate Moss.
If I get hired as a French speaking programmer, and I can't either speak French or program, I'm a total lier and will probably go out the door in flames when I get fired. I don't think outsourced teams should be exempted from this.
I have had success in outsourcing QA. The key is to either have people onshore who can communicate with them over phones or someone offshore who is a good communicator and have him/her explain things in person.
>Matthew/Chicago: I think I’m in the Twilight Zone.
Can't 'Matt' fathom that his message might be confusing to a non-native speaker? Couldn't he have put it in plain words before just firing someone over IM in a rage?
There is a proper way to 'let go' of people even if you think they are morons. Maybe it was a show-off to the '20 very concerned UAW workers' in the room?
'Hey, looks like we failed at outsourcing properly, but I just fired the guy responsible for this mess. That should make it okay, right?'