Curated by: Sergio A. Martínez

What does a good cultural approach look like? Simple things like making sure there are clear paths for communication within the team and offering opportunities for people to get more involved with projects if they feel passionate about them is a good start, for example. Having a strong corporate culture doesn’t have to mean investing in large-scale activities – it takes small steps every day towards building relationships between teammates and creating an environment where everyone can contribute and do their best work.

However, it’s easy to lose sight of what makes a culture truly effective. Many software development organizations believe that a good environment consists entirely of free snacks and coffee, unlimited vacation policies, quirky office decorations, and the like. These perks are nice to have, sure, but they alone will not create a culture; it’s more important to have the right people with the right values in charge, who prioritize collaboration and transparency so teams work together effectively and everyone has access to information they need to make decisions. 

After all, the endgame of a comfortable work environment is fostering productivity – providing the correct workspaces (both in the office and remotely), and open communication goes a long way towards creating a pleasant place to write code and solve programming challenges. Ultimately, a good corporate culture that supports software development involves understanding what motivates your team members and showing them their work is respected and valued. This is one of the main reasons why we strive to foster the best culture possible at Scio. So, with that in mind, we want to discuss some of the common myths of building a great culture, what a good approach might look like, and whether or not developing this kind of environment inside a company improves your possibilities of success. 

Myth #1: Establishing a set of values is enough.

Today it is pretty much expected for any serious company to be guided by a core set of values that, in theory, represent what the organization is all about. And while having these values is an important step towards building a strong and healthy working culture within a software development company, that, by itself, is not enough. There has to be buy-in among the employees, with these values understood and incorporated into their everyday work. 

That’s why it’s so important to build clear communication around them, make sure everyone involved shares the same sensibilities, and regularly celebrate the successes that reflect these values. It’s also vitally important to regularly discuss how they’re being put into action and identify where they may be slipping to rectify any issues quickly. If this isn’t done in earnest then having core values won’t do much for your culture at all; they will become just words on paper that will neither help nor encourage anything among the employees. You have to dedicate time, effort, and energy regularly if you want the benefits of a good culture that those values should bring.

Myth #2: It’s all about the perks

Having cool perks may seem like a great way to attract employees and keep them motivated and engaged, but it shouldn’t be confused with having a good corporate culture. Things like free meals and gym memberships are nice, but ultimately those things don’t do much to improve the environment of your business. To create a strong corporate culture, you have to go beyond material incentives. You need to emphasize collaboration and respect among colleagues; focus on fostering an open exchange of ideas; prioritize employee wellness both physical and mental; create clear standards for accountability; and recognize individual successes. In other words, a truly nurturing workplace is made up of meaningful conversations, opportunities to learn, and a sense of belonging for all staff regardless of their backgrounds.  

So, while perks can be part of creating a positive office atmosphere, they shouldn’t be used as a stand-in for a real corporate culture implementation. Good corporate cultures foster creativity and morale, giving employees a platform to express their ideas without feeling like they won’t be listened to or judged unfairly. Companies should remember that the spark of meaningful relationships among staff is much more valuable than offering one-stop solutions like free snacks or ping pong tables.

Myth #3: Culture Is Just Another Management Fad

The talk of good corporate cultures has picked up in the last decade, so it’s easy to brush it aside as the current fad among the Tech sectors. But in reality, it’s a precious resource that helps organizations succeed. Things like team bonding, creating an open and supportive atmosphere and having leaders who listen to feedback are all factors that help convince people to stay on board, work better together, and generate more robust results.

So, with the increased focus on healthy team dynamics over the past few years, many organizations have seen firsthand the rewards of an invested and cohesive corporate culture. Scio, for example, knows that a good culture makes teams more productive, and happier at work, giving them a sense of pride working together – none of which exists in companies that don’t put effort into fostering a positive team environment. So while it may seem like corporate culture is just another trend right now, in reality, it’s become a crucial element of success for software development stories.

Myth #4: HR is the one responsible for a good working culture

In that same sense, taking its internal culture seriously can seem to be the kind of issue that the Human Resources department (HR) exists for, leaving them responsible for designing, implementing, and making sure this culture exists. And while HR often gets credited with essential tasks like hiring, payroll management, and creating employee handbooks, reality can be a tad more complicated than that. HR is an integral part of any successful corporate culture, no doubt about it, but a strong corporate culture is something that everyone should be invested in creating. 

Healthy workplace culture can have a real-world impact on employees’ lives, after all – from greater job satisfaction to better performance and higher retention rates, when corporate culture isn’t treated as a sideshow but given the attention it deserves, everybody ultimately benefits. The HR team can bring structure and consistency to challenges of conflict resolution, personnel procedures, setting job expectations, and setting the tone for the values and objectives that employees should strive to embody when in their roles, but they are just one part of this puzzle. Supervisors, leadership teams, and employees all have to play their role in bringing these elements together to create a productive working environment.

Myth #5: It doesn’t impact the bottom line

Sure, a good corporate culture sounds nice to have, but the biggest question behind these kinds of efforts is always the same: will it have a positive impact on our bottom line? Good software development relies on cooperation and clear communication between team members, both of which are made seamless by fostering a positive corporate culture. Teams that have a healthier corporate culture can quickly pick up new processes and identify areas for improvement. 

What’s more, employees who feel genuinely valued in their work environment have greater motivation to create the best solutions possible and take ownership of their projects. An excellent corporate culture is also invaluable during times of change or challenge. It allows developers to band together and come up with creative solutions to any obstacles they may encounter while keeping their spirits high. So yes, having a good corporate culture in the workplace is critical for any business that wants success. When employees feel valued, supported, and connected to the company’s mission, they are far more likely to respond with enthusiasm and dedication, which will impact morale throughout the company. Additionally, when customers recognize a company’s commitment to a strong corporate culture, they tend to view them more favorably resulting in more customer loyalty – a win for everyone!

Some final words

Building a good corporate culture is one of the most important and sometimes overlooked aspects of software development. A strong corporate culture helps foster collaboration between teams, provides a clear set of values to adhere to, and ultimately leads to better outcomes. People are the core foundation for any successful enterprise, so creating an atmosphere that allows developers to work together towards a common goal is essential in providing robust solutions. 

Good software development, in the end, is a combination of having the right tools, knowledge, and environment available. If any one of these three components is missing, success becomes elusive and the desired outcome might falter. Although having great tools easily accessible and having experts to help with coding issues is important, having a good working environment can be the foundation for achieving a successful project outcome. A positive work environment enables the team to interact and communicate better, sets expectations so everyone knows what’s expected of them, boosts morale and motivation levels among team members, and facilitates problem-solving through brainstorming sessions. In short, creating an environment of support helps the entire team reach their goals faster while still maintaining quality.

The Key Takeaways

• Good company culture is more than just a fad or a tool to entice new developers to join your organization: it’s key to success.
• However, there are plenty of misunderstandings and myths behind the development of a good working culture that need to be dispelled.
• Among them is the idea that a good company culture is just a collection of perks, or that it doesn’t affect a company’s bottom line at all.
• The reality is that making the effort to foster a good culture means that the people within it have a better environment to make projects shine, reach positive outcomes, and all in all positively affect your client.

Scio is an established Nearshore software development company based in Mexico that specializes in providing high-quality, cost-effective technologies for pioneering tech companies. We have been building and mentoring teams of engineers since 2003 and our experience gives us access not only to the knowledge but also the expertise needed when tackling any project. Get started today by contacting us about your project needs – We have teams available to help you achieve your business goals. Get in contact today!

Curated by: Sergio A. Martínez

And one of the great things is that there’s always something new to learn. Whether it’s a new programming language, a new tool, a new framework, or a new way of approaching a problem, keeping your skills sharp is essential to being successful in this field. This is why some people think that being too comfortable in a software job can be bad for learning and innovating. After all, if you’re not being challenged, it’s easy to get complacent and fall behind the curve. Right?

The common idea seems to be that, when it comes to creating software, you need to get out of your comfort zone to progress; many developers look for a constant challenge, striving to grow their skills as much as possible, and mastering lots of different disciplines and technologies for the thrill of it. However, there’s also a lot to be said for having a solid foundation of knowledge and experience to build on, which leads us to the question: Is it bad to keep a comfort zone in software development?

“It comes down to what somebody wants out of a career”, says Helena Matamoros, Head of Human Capital at Scio, about the context behind a comfort zone. “It’s definitely not wrong if you are only interested in having a stable and well-paying job where you are skilled, deliver the expected results, and can manage a pretty defined work-life balance. If you are good at what you do, who’s to say that’s the wrong path to take? Being comfortable in the job can lead to greater creativity and innovation, as you’re more likely to take risks when you’re not constantly having to worry about making mistakes.”

The skill behind developing skills

“Comfort zones” are usually misunderstood, giving them some of the negative qualities that many people give to them. A comfort zone, after all, is an important concept in psychology that refers to a behavioral state within which a person feels relaxed and comfortable, a necessity when people are interested in learning new skills. The first time you try something new, it’s easy to feel anxious and uncertain, but as you become more familiar with the task, you are more open to taking risks and trying new ideas, which is essential for learning. In the words of the Psychology Spot article “What is the Comfort Zone – and what’s not?”:

“[Comfort zones are] a ‘space’ that we know completely and in which we control almost everything. The habits that we follow with assiduity are those that allow us to build that comfort zone since we know exactly what we can expect from each situation. By minimizing uncertainty, we feel that we have everything more or less under control, so we believe we are safe.”

Some of the negativity around comfort zones come from believing that the “comfort” part equals “complacency” or “stagnation” instead of “control”, or the feeling of knowing exactly what you are doing in a given situation, pretty important when performing a job that requires as much focus and understanding as software development. How can a person expect to take a risk if they feel uncomfortable about it? Or learn everything there is to know about a subject if they are not willing (or able) to stay focused on it for a significant period?

“I’m not interested in people getting rid of their comfort zones“, says Rhonda Britten, a bestselling author on the topic of fear, as quoted by this WebMD blog. “In fact, you want to have the largest comfort zone possible — because the larger it is, the more masterful you feel in more areas of your life. When you have a large comfort zone, you can take risks that really shift you.“

In other words, the idea of “stepping outside of your comfort zone to grow” might not be a useful framework to understand how people acquire and develop new skills, it’s more about knowing where your talents lie and making the most of them when given the chance. A different approach might be useful, especially if you, as a developer, are interested in learning as much as you can, with a rock-solid foundation that lets you push through every new challenge.

Carving up your comfort zone

When used properly, comfort zones can be a positive force. After all, it’s only natural to feel more comfortable working with familiar technologies and tools, and it can be more efficient to stick with what you know rather than attempting to apply something new every time you join a project. But this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try to learn new skills if you feel confident enough in what you already do. For example, if you’re already an expert in a particular programming language and can fall back into it if the need arises, why not learn a new one? Or go a step beyond and go into different parts of the software development process, like QA or Project Management? This way, you have two possible outcomes: you either learn a new, valuable skill you can use, or you discover an area that is not right for you and can go back to what you are good at.

“If your objective is to grow within a company, climbing up positions and leading a team of people, a comfort zone in the classic sense will not help you”, continues Helen, describing a bad application of a comfort zone. “It’s more of a personal preference about how you apply your skills, and it doesn’t mean complacency or a ‘quiet quitting’ situation. It’s about building a rock-solid base to take new risks and opportunities, extrapolating what you are good at into other areas where your talent might shine. Being comfortable doing so is an advantage, not a bad thing.”

Ultimately, whether being comfortable on the job is good or bad for learning and innovation depends on the individual and the situation. There’s no question that comfort is important in any job; if you’re stressed out and uncomfortable, it’s going to be pretty hard to focus on your work. But when it comes to software development, focusing on honing your existing skills and becoming an expert in your field is different from being constantly pushed to learn new things and innovate. While it’s important to push yourself occasionally, there’s no need to completely overhaul your workflow every time you hit a snag. 

Of course, there’s a balance to be struck here. You don’t want to be constantly stressed out and on the verge of burnout, but never being challenged or forced to step outside of what you are used to doing is not good either as you may find that your skills start to stagnate. Enjoying what you learn, applying it, and mastering it as a skill is never a bad thing.

The Key Takeaways

• One of the best things about software development is learning new skills and growing as a developer, but there are some misconceptions about how that’s achieved.
• Typically, comfort zones are seen as something negative, but that’s because they tend to be misunderstood.
• Comfort zones, when used properly, can give you the confidence to learn new skills, take risks and open yourself to mastering all kinds of technologies.
• Being comfortable in your skills is never a bad thing, and in fact can be a great starting point to always learn something new.

Scio is an established Nearshore software development company based in Mexico that specializes in providing high-quality, cost-effective technologies for pioneering tech companies. We have been building and mentoring teams of engineers since 2003 and our experience gives us access not only to the knowledge but also the expertise needed when tackling any project. Get started today by contacting us about your project needs – We have teams available to help you achieve your business goals. Get in contact today!

Curated by: Sergio A. Martínez

However, when it comes to mobile development, there are a few different schools of thought about the best way to design an app. While native development is popular, others prefer cross-platform or web development, and each has important advantages and disadvantages that could very well decide the outcome of a project from the very beginning. For that reason, it’s important to choose the right approach, which ultimately depends on the specific needs of the app, and the resources needed to bring it to life. So, today we bring the question: is native development always the best choice? Or does it have some hidden hurdles that could jeopardize a project in the long run? 

Because one thing is sure: with the complexity of today’s development environments, these questions are more difficult to answer than ever, but the correct choice is critical to ensure a positive outcome in any development project. After all, the wrong choice can mean more than a negative outcome (even setting a project back by months or years), so today we want to take a look into native development, the needs of mobile app design, and the pros and cons of choosing either approach, to see if the myth of “native development is always better” holds true or not.

Going native (in app development)

The debate between native and web-based app development has been ongoing for a long time. Seeing how mobile applications are increasing in importance almost daily, pros and cons are thrown around all the time, and the correct choice for a given project depends on a wide range of variables. One key consideration, for example, is the target audience for the app; if the app is being developed for a general consumer audience, then a web-based approach may be more appropriate, because they can be accessed across a wide range of devices, including laptops, tablets, and smartphones. 

In contrast, native apps are typically designed for a specific operating system (such as iOS or Android) and can only be installed on devices that use that OS, likely making native apps less accessible to potential users, with the trade-off that this approach reduces the amount of work a development team needs to do to get the application up and running. With a very specific environment, there’s less room for errors. 

Another important factor to consider is the level of functionality required by the app: if it needs to take advantage of features that are specific to a particular platform (such as GPS or camera), then native development may be the only option. However, if the app can function adequately using web-based technologies, then a cross-platform approach may be more efficient and cost-effective. The correct choice depends, then, entirely on context: 

“Software development is a complex process, and there are many decisions that need to be made upfront. Some of these choices are technical in nature, others are more strategic, and still, others are more creative, such as coming up with new features or designing the user interface. With so many things to consider, it’s no wonder that making the right choices is critical for success”, says Adolfo Cruz, PMO Director and Partner at Scio. “Unfortunately, there is no easy formula for ensuring that all of the choices you make are correct; it requires a combination of experience, knowledge, and intuition. And in the case of native or web-based development, thinking ahead is critical, in terms of resources and work needed to make them work.”

There’s one thing for sure: native apps can be more expensive to develop and maintain. There are a lot of factors that contribute to their high cost, but first and foremost is that you have to design and develop separate versions of your app for each platform (iOS, Android, Windows, etc.) if you want to open your user base after the fact. That means more man-hours spent on development and more money spent on software licenses and other tools; for example, an app for iOS would need to be written in Swift or Objective-C, while an Android app would need to be written in Java or Kotlin, making cross-porting difficult. In addition, each platform has its own set of guidelines and best practices that need to be followed, making the development process more time-consuming and complicated.

In that sense, native app development can (counter-intuitively) be generally more complex than web or hybrid apps, increasing the odds that something will go wrong during development. On one hand, they can be more difficult to scale, as they need to be developed separately for each platform. And on the other hand, native apps can be less flexible than cross-platform or web-based apps, which can be developed using a single codebase and then deployed on multiple platforms. 

“Developers often think that it’s easier to strictly focus on building apps with the manufacturer SDKs and getting them to market. Native development has advantages, but without an integrated approach that provides app management, analytics, testing, and back-end integration, native app development has the potential to create more issues, more complexity, and increased spending down the road”, is the analysis of the tech news site SD Times. “If integration isn’t done right the first time, future projects will be delayed, and it will lead to an influx of performance issues that will only lead to more work for the developers and potentially unsatisfied users.

A zero-sum game

If you think that choosing between native development and a hybrid or web-based approach seems to be a zero-sum game, you would be right. After all, there’s no way you make a choice that wouldn’t have a counterweight somewhere during the development process, so careful consideration should be given to your approach to designing a new app. In terms of the needs of a project, we can select four key areas that your team might need to consider before starting a project:

• Resources: The amount of time, money, and man-hours needed to bring the project to fruition. The more platforms, the more resources are needed.
• Userbase: The number of users a specific app can reach depending on its platform. The more platforms, the bigger the number of users.
• Functionality: The number of challenges, errors, and bugs a team might need to fix, which become bigger as the number of platforms intended grows. 
• Future: The more platforms the app is available, the easier the task of keeping it available for longer, not running the risk of getting it “landlocked” in an environment.

Native development, for example, can provide a better user experience, but as we already mentioned, it may be more time-consuming and expensive. A web-based development, in contrast, is faster and generally needs fewer resources but has the risk of offering a subpar experience for some users with the “wrong” kind of device.

And of course, this table doesn’t take into consideration things like specific features needed for the app (which might change the value weight of each of these choices), or more nuanced circumstances in development, like the adoption rate of a determined platform in a specific region, or circumstances outside development (like legal requirements when publishing apps), but it illustrates how this decision might require a careful balance between outcomes. 

“It can be tempting to want to develop a native app for every new platform that comes out. After all, native apps tend to provide the best performance and the most seamless user experience”, concludes Adolfo Cruz. “However, there are some specific scenarios where native app development just doesn’t make sense, such as if you’re only developing a simple app or if you need to support older devices. In general, it’s important to carefully weigh the pros and cons of native app development before making a decision. Every positive outcome comes from understanding the nuance of development, and ultimately depends on the needs of the project, keeping in mind that each approach has its advantages and disadvantages.”

The Key Takeaways

• Creating software requires making a lot of difficult choices to ensure the success of an app, especially in the current mobile environment.
• There are a wide variety of approaches to this, but one of the most popular is native development, or designing for a specific, particular, platform.
• Although native development has lots of advantages, especially on the back end, sometimes these advantages are not enough to counter a web-based approach.
• Careful consideration of the pros and cons, a clear picture of the direction of the app, and using your resources properly are what will determine the need for native development, but it shouldn’t be treated as a default.

Scio is an established Nearshore software development company based in Mexico that specializes in providing high-quality, cost-effective technologies for pioneering tech companies. We have been building and mentoring teams of engineers since 2003 and our experience gives us access not only to the knowledge but also the expertise needed when tackling any project. Get started today by contacting us about your project needs – We have teams available to help you achieve your business goals. Get in contact today!