“They have programmers in Mexico?”: The story of remote work at Scio with CEO and Founder Luis Aburto (Part 1)

“They have programmers in Mexico?”: The story of remote work at Scio with CEO and Founder Luis Aburto (Part 1)

By Scio Team 
Luis Aburto, CEO and Founder of Scio, a nearshore software development company in Mexico, specializing in remote teams for U.S. tech companies.
When it comes to working remotely and managing a hybrid working model, nothing is better than hearing it from someone doing it since 2003. So we sat down with Luis Aburto, CEO and Founder of Scio to find out what worked, what didn’t, what is Nearshore development, and the long road from emails to agile methodologies. Enjoy!
As a potential client, if I wanted to work with Nearshore developers, I would like to know how they can maintain cohesion in the team. Anyone can say “I’ll find you a developer” and then open LinkedIn, but that doesn’t make you a recruiter.

It’s not about just finding resources, it’s about building high-performing teams of people who integrate well, and I’d like to see how they achieve that and motivate their collaborators to strive for a well-done job. That’s what I would look for in a Nearshore company.

Scio started all the way back in 2003, and in the years since, it refined a unique perspective on software development, remote hybrid work, and what’s next for a programmer interested in joining an industry at the forefront of innovation and adaptability. But how did it all begin?

Luis Aburto, CEO and Founder of Scio, a nearshore software development company in Mexico, specializing in remote teams for U.S. tech companies.
Luis Aburto, CEO & Founder of Scio, on building nearshore software teams for U.S. companies—especially in Texas.

Nearshore: A new way to develop software

Well, at the end of the 90s, very few organizations in the US realized that software development could be done in Mexico. Clients had the idea that “IT outsourcing” was something you did in India, and nowhere else you could get these kinds of services.

One of the first companies to talk about “Nearshore development” was Softtek, which started to promote this model around 1998 or so. At the time, the attitude was something like “Seriously? They have programmers in Mexico?”, and certain friction existed towards the idea of outsourcing development here.

Now, since Scio began, our focus has been working with North American clients so, by definition, we have been doing remote work since day one. Sure, we occasionally visited clients to discuss the stages of a project, collect requirements, and present advances, but collaboration has mainly been remote, through conference calls and the like.

Technology wasn’t what it is now. Skype was the most advanced thing then, but Internet speeds gave us barely enough quality to do videoconferences, so we used phone landlines and conference speakers to make calls. It sounds quaint nowadays, I think, but it helped us start developing efficient ways to collaborate remotely.

It all happened exclusively at the office, too. Today it is very common to have a good broadband connection with optical fiber at home, but in ’03, dedicated Internet connections for businesses were barely enough, so if you worked from home, sending your code to a remote server somewhere and trying to integrate it with the code written by the office team was a very slow process, and not efficient at all.

Vintage office desk with a typewriter, invoices, and coins—illustrating the pre-Cloud era of software development and Scio’s early remote-work context serving U.S. clients from Mexico.
Early nearshore realities: collaborating with U.S. clients from Mexico before Cloud DevOps—foundations that shaped Scio’s modern remote delivery.
Also, we didn’t have stuff like GitHub or Azure DevOps, where everybody can send their code to the Cloud and run tests from there, so even if your clients were remote, you needed to be at the office to access your Source Code Repository with reasonable speed.

Internet speeds eventually started to get better and the possibility of working from home became more feasible. Around 2012 we started by implementing a policy where you could choose one day to work remotely per week, so by the time this pandemic got here, everyone already had a computer and good Internet plans, so it wasn’t a very radical change for us. We just leaped from doing it a single day of the week to doing it daily.

And yes, I do mean “this” pandemic because it isn’t the first one Scio has gone through. Back in 2009, we had the Swine Flu (AH1N1) in Mexico, and we had to completely shut down because going home and working from there couldn’t be done by everyone. The infrastructure necessary wasn’t there yet, so you couldn’t ask the team to work remotely overnight, even for a short while.

Other things changed once we could implement this “Home Office Day” policy, mainly realizing this was not a “lost” day of work. The response to it was great, as you could keep in contact with the team without getting lost in a “black hole” of not knowing what was going on, and do other stuff if your tasks allowed it.

Eventually, we had a couple of team members that, for personal reasons, left the office to work remotely full-time. The spouse of one of them got a job in Guadalajara and he didn’t want to leave us, so asked if we would be okay with this arrangement. After some time seeing how well this worked out, we fully opened to the idea of hiring more people remotely, to the point we had four full-time collaborators in Guadalajara on a co-working space we rented so they wouldn’t feel alone.

Computer screens with programming code reflected on eyeglasses, symbolizing Scio’s transition from email-based workflows to agile methodologies for U.S. clients.
Scio’s shift from email-heavy workflows to agile practices transformed collaboration with U.S. tech companies.

A technology leap

For our clients, things worked a little differently too. Back in the early 2000’s, collaboration happened a lot through email, where you had these long chains of messages that contained whole project proposals and development plans.

You can still do that of course, but it’s more common nowadays to just say “hey, let’s have a quick call, I’ll explain this and you can give me your feedback” to arrive at a decision, than having to compose an email, read it, discuss it with every relevant person, take note of all the stuff that wasn’t clear, and respond back and forth during the whole dev cycle.

This was our very early collaboration flow until agile methodologies became the norm. Soon our teams had daily scrum meetings with clients, with the key difference that, instead of a call of 10 or 15 participants joining from home, you had a meeting between two boardrooms: on one side of the call was the team at Scio, and on the other, our counterparts at the client’s office.

Everyone gave their status and comments, and once we finished, further exchanges were done by email or phone calls. We canceled several phone lines last year, by the way, when we realized they hadn’t been used in years. In the beginning, we needed lots of lines for every team to keep in touch with their respective clients, but now Zoom, Hangouts, Microsoft Teams, and Slack offer plenty of more convenient options to do so. Shortly before the COVID-19 pandemic, this was still our collaboration dynamic, with two meeting rooms giving their respective status, and anyone working from home for the day joining the call.

Developer working remotely on a laptop during a video call, showing Scio’s bilingual nearshore collaboration with U.S. tech teams.
Scio’s remote-ready developers in Mexico work seamlessly with U.S. teams thanks to strong English skills and cultural alignment.
But now that everyone is working remotely, barriers have started to diminish, both in culture and in attitude. In the US you are probably already working with people in California, Texas, or New York, so working with someone in Mexico doesn’t feel different, as long as the language skills of the person are good.

The newer generations of developers and engineers have a better level of English now than just a few years ago. Maybe because there are more opportunities to get acquainted with the language; earlier you had to go to very specific stores to get books and other materials in English, which wasn’t cheap, and without stuff like YouTube and Netflix, the type of content you could get to practice was very limited.

This evolution of the software developers, when you are not limited to local options as long as you have the necessary skills to collaborate with a remote team, is very notable. The people we used to hire outside of Morelia were the ones willing to move here, and the process of seeking out people to explicitly be remote collaborators was gradual until we developed a whole process to assess which ones fit Scio’s culture the best.

Team meeting in a bright office, illustrating the importance of soft skills in Scio’s nearshore software development teams for U.S. companies.
At Scio, strong communication and collaboration skills are as valuable as technical expertise when working with U.S. clients.

Soft skills: The key to a good team

In that sense, I think soft skills will have more weight in the long run than purely technical skills. Someone with an average technical level, but who is proactive, knows how to communicate, and can identify priorities is someone who brings more value to a team than a technology wizard that doesn’t play along and keeps themself isolated, or assumes stuff instead of validating it.

You would think social skills are irrelevant for someone working remotely when they are actually critical to collaborate effectively. Some people prefer to not interact with others and would rather just get instructions on what to do, but this only works for well-defined tasks in which it is very clear what you are trying to accomplish.

I know this is the optimal way to collaborate for those developers who are less interested in social aspects, but it doesn’t work for projects that require innovation, creativity, and problem solving, with complex workflows involving tons of people whose input is important at every step.

This is why, I think the “introvert programmer” stereotype is something of a myth, at least nowadays. This profession is moving towards a place where the most valuable persons are the ones with a well-rounded profile, capable of communicating with the business sponsors, his or her coworkers, and final users, and not only those who are super-gifted in their programming skills.

People in software, as a whole, are becoming more versatile, and the ones capable of connecting are going to be more visible and be considered more valuable, getting more opportunities in their careers. This is what I can say about the path that the people at Scio have followed so far. From now on, collaboration is a priority because remote work makes it more important than ever, and motivating and stimulating this collaboration, indeed this cohesion, is what will differentiate good Nearshore companies from the best ones.

Better Interviews, Smarter Augmentation: Reducing Interview Risks When Outsourcing to LatAm Partners 

Better Interviews, Smarter Augmentation: Reducing Interview Risks When Outsourcing to LatAm Partners 

By Rod Aburto
Smiling candidate during a nearshore technical interview, representing staff augmentation from Latin America

Introduction

When you’re a Software Development Manager trying to grow a team, interviews are your last line of defense—and often your first real contact with a developer your outsourcing partner claims is “a perfect fit.” But too often, that fit falls apart the moment the Zoom call starts.

Over my years helping US-based teams scale with nearshore engineers from Latin America, I’ve heard the same concerns time and again:

  • “The resume looked great, but the candidate couldn’t explain their past work.”
  • “We had a hard time understanding each other.”
  • “They said they were Agile, but couldn’t describe a sprint.”
  • “This feels like body shopping.”

These are outsourcing concerns that go far beyond technology—they’re about trust, alignment, and interview quality. And they’re absolutely valid.

So how do we fix it?

In this post, I want to share the perspective I’ve gained at Scio Consulting working with companies who expect more than warm bodies. I’ll cover:

  • The core risks managers face when interviewing external candidates
  • Why staff augmentation from LatAm has unique advantages—and challenges
  • What better interviews look like
  • And how a trusted partner can dramatically reduce your risk

The Problem with Interviews in Staff Augmentation

Let’s get one thing out of the way: interviews are already hard. You’re juggling schedules, context-switching out of your sprint, and trying to assess someone’s ability to write clean code, communicate clearly, and be a positive force on your team—all in 45 minutes.
Now layer on:

  • Cultural or language mismatches
  • Unclear expectations about the role
  • External recruiters who barely understand your product
  • Inflated resumes or coached responses
  • Vendors who disappear after sending over candidates

It’s no wonder so many Software Development Managers tell me they’ve “been burned” by augmentation before.

In short, the outsourcing concern here is calibration. Are we speaking the same language? Are we aligned on expectations? Are you trying to make a commission, or do you care if this person thrives on my team?

Single standout block among many, symbolizing the importance of identifying the right developer in nearshore interviews
Effective interviews help distinguish the right candidate—not just a good résumé.

Why Interviews with Nearshore Teams Require a Different Approach

In theory, staff augmentation in LatAm solves many pain points:

  • Time zone alignment
  • Lower costs than US-based engineers
  • Cultural overlap and strong English proficiency
  • Faster ramp-up times

But in practice, those benefits only come after you’ve found and validated the right people.

And validation starts with—you guessed it—interviews.

That’s where many vendors drop the ball. They treat interviews as the client’s job alone, offering up semi-qualified candidates, crossing their fingers, and moving on to the next request if it doesn’t work out.

But this model creates interview fatigue, wastes time, and damages trust. You don’t want 10 “maybes.” You want 2 “hell yes” candidates.

What “Better Interviews” Actually Mean

If I had to define what “better interviews” look like in the context of nearshore staff augmentation from LatAm, it would be this:

A better interview is a conversation between a well-prepared client and a highly-aligned candidate, facilitated by a partner who’s done their homework.

Let’s break that down.

1. Better interviews start before the interview

A trusted partner doesn’t just toss resumes over the fence. They:

  • Take time to understand your tech stack and team dynamics
  • Align on what success looks like for the role
  • Conduct internal pre-interviews with behavioral and technical checkpoints
  • Involve currently assigned team members in the screening
  • Filter out candidates who aren’t a real fit—before you ever see them

At Scio, we often say we “interview for you, not just with you.” That means using your values, your stack, your expectations—not just a generic checklist.

2. Candidates are calibrated, not coached

Some vendors train candidates to “get through” your interview. We calibrate them so they can connect with your team. That means:

  • Helping them understand your product
  • Providing context on your engineering culture
  • Practicing communication in English
  • Making sure they can explain their experience clearly and honestly

This isn’t hand-holding—it’s leveling the playing field so the interview is about fit, not miscommunication.

3. There’s accountability after the call

Here’s a secret: a good partner wants your feedback, even when it’s negative.

If a candidate misses the mark, we want to know:

  • Where did the interview go off-track?
  • Was it a skill mismatch or a soft skill issue?
  • How can we improve the next match?

We treat every interview as a feedback loop, not a transaction.

Laptop screen with profile icons and checkmarks, symbolizing interview screening and candidate selection in nearshore outsourcing
At Scio, we treat interviews as a discovery process—not just a filter.

How Scio Minimizes Interview Risks for US Clients

When I work with our client partners, we do a lot of things differently. Here’s how Scio tackles interview-related outsourcing concerns:

Deep Discovery & Role Definition

Before we ever share a CV, we spend time with the hiring manager understanding

  • Must-have vs nice-to-have skills
  • Day-to-day responsibilities
  • Team structure and rituals
  • Communication style and collaboration norms

This means we don’t waste your time with “maybe” candidates.

Developer Calibration Program

Every developer we propose goes through:

  • English fluency screening
  • Behavioral interviews focused on problem-solving and proactivity
  • Technical evaluations mapped to your tech stack

This helps ensure they’re interview-ready—and team-ready.

Post-Interview Follow-Up

We schedule debriefs after each interview to understand:

  • What worked
  • What didn’t
  • What to adjust

It’s not about pushing candidates—it’s about building trust.

The “Trusted Partner” Difference

When I hear managers say, “This candidate felt different,” it’s not just about skills. It’s because the whole process felt different.

They weren’t wasting time sifting through noise.
They weren’t struggling to connect over Zoom.
They weren’t doing the vendor’s job for them.

They were working with a trusted partner who brought them ready-to-interview developers—not just names in a database.

That’s what makes staff augmentation in LatAm work long-term. Not just lower costs. Not just shared time zones. But shared standards, ownership, and care.

Final Thoughts: It’s Not Just the Interview. It’s the Intent.

If you’re augmenting your team from Latin America—or anywhere—the interview is your moment of truth. Don’t let it be your biggest risk.

A better partner will give you:

  • Fewer but stronger candidates
  • Insight, not guesswork
  • A process that gets better over time
  • And developers who shine in interviews because they’re the real deal

At Scio, we don’t just want to make interviews easier. We want to make them meaningful—the start of a relationship, not a gamble.

Because when interviews go right, everything that follows gets better too.

Want to Learn More?

If you’re facing outsourcing concerns and want to work with a trusted partner focused on better interviews and high-performing staff augmentation in LatAm, let’s connect.

We’d love to show you what a better process—and a better partnership—really looks like.

Rod Aburto

Rod Aburto

Nearshore Staffing Expert

Strategic Nearshoring for Tech Companies: Luis Aburto’s Vision for Outcomes-Driven Partnerships

Strategic Nearshoring for Tech Companies: Luis Aburto’s Vision for Outcomes-Driven Partnerships

Written by: Luis Aburto – 

Strategic Nearshoring for Tech Companies: Luis Aburto’s Vision for Outcomes-Driven Partnerships

The Software Development leaders of tech companies are constantly searching for ways to scale their engineering teams, hit aggressive product development milestones, and deliver innovation more efficiently. While outsourcing has traditionally been a common solution, many tech companies are finding that simple transactional relationships with outsourcing providers fall short of delivering the long-term results they need.

For Luis Aburto, CEO of Scio, the answer lies in strategic nearshoring and a shift toward outcomes-driven partnerships. Scio, a software development company based in Mexico, leverages nearshoring to help North American tech companies scale their teams with real-time collaboration, cultural alignment, and cost efficiency.

In this interview, John Suvanto, a renowned Vistage Chair in Dallas, TX and Luis’ Executive Coach, explores how Scio’s Outcomes-Driven Engagement Model and its focus on business and cultural alignment are reshaping the way tech companies approach partnerships. Together, they dive into how Scio is helping companies achieve measurable business outcomes, improve engineering productivity, and meet product roadmap goals more effectively through long-term collaboration.

Interview

John Suvanto (Chair, Vistage Dallas):

Luis, it’s great to sit down with you again. As someone who’s watched your journey for several years, I’ve been particularly impressed with how Scio has developed its Outcomes-Driven Engagement Model. For our readers, could you start by introducing Scio and sharing a bit about the philosophy behind this model?

Luis Aburto (CEO, Scio):

Thanks, John. I’m happy to be here and to talk about our approach. Scio is a software development company based in Austin, TX that leverages talent in Mexico and other countries in Latin America to deliver custom technology solutions to North American clients. So, one of the key aspects of our business model is nearshoring—we’re in the same or similar time zones as our clients, which allows for real-time collaboration, faster decision-making, and better cultural alignment, all while keeping costs competitive.

As we’ve grown, we recognized that the traditional transactional outsourcing model wasn’t enough to truly support our clients’ needs—especially tech or tech-enabled companies that are scaling rapidly or trying to hit aggressive product development goals. That’s where our Outcomes-Driven Engagement Model comes in. Instead of just delivering a service and moving on, we partner with our clients to align our work with their business outcomes, focusing on achieving real, measurable results.

John Suvanto:

I think that’s an important distinction. Many companies that work with external development teams are used to a time and materials or a deliverables-based approach, but you’ve shifted the conversation to outcomes, which requires a much deeper partnership. How does this shift impact the way you engage with your clients?

Luis Aburto:

It fundamentally changes the relationship. In a typical transactional model, success is measured by completing tasks—delivering features, closing out tickets, or meeting deadlines. But these outputs don’t always lead to real business impact. Our model is different because we’re not just focused on what we’re delivering today; we’re focused on what that delivery is achieving in the long term.

From the very beginning of an engagement, we sit down with our clients to define outcomes that are aligned with their business objectives. This could be improving product development cycles, increasing productivity in their engineering teams, or hitting specific product roadmap milestones. We commit to those outcomes and share accountability for achieving them. It’s a deeper partnership where both sides are fully invested in long-term success.

John Suvanto:

And that level of shared accountability must build a great deal of trust with your clients. You’re essentially aligning your own success with theirs. How do you measure this success, especially when you’re focusing on long-term outcomes?

Luis Aburto:

Exactly, John. Trust is a key component of this model, and shared accountability is at the heart of it. We establish key performance indicators (KPIs) that reflect the outcomes we’ve agreed on. These KPIs aren’t just about completing tasks—they’re about the business impact. For example, if a client’s goal is to increase development velocity, we’ll measure not just how many features we’re delivering, but whether those features are helping the client meet their product roadmap milestones more efficiently.

We also conduct regular reviews to ensure that we’re on track, and we adapt as needed. This level of flexibility is crucial because business needs evolve. What we’re focused on at the start of the partnership might change as the client’s product or market situation shifts. Our model is designed to be adaptive, ensuring that we’re always aligned with their priorities.

John Suvanto:

That adaptability is essential, especially in tech where things can change quickly. Now, Scio operates using a nearshoring model, which I know is a big part of your value proposition. Can you explain how nearshoring fits into this Outcomes-Driven Engagement Model and how it benefits your tech clients?

Luis Aburto:

Nearshoring is a huge advantage for us and for our clients. Having our team members based in Mexico and throughout Latin America, and serving clients primarily in North America, we’re working in similar time zones, which makes real-time collaboration much easier than with traditional offshore teams. Our clients don’t have to deal with significant time delays—they can have a meeting with our development team during their business hours and get immediate responses. This improves communication, speeds up decision-making, and ultimately makes the development process more efficient.

In addition, the cultural alignment we have with our clients plays a big role in building trust and collaboration. There’s a better understanding of business practices, expectations, and workflows, which reduces friction. But at the same time, our nearshoring model allows for cost efficiencies compared to working with onshore teams, so our clients are getting the best of both worlds—quality and affordability.

This combination of nearshoring and our Outcomes-Driven Engagement Model allows us to be a true partner, embedded in the day-to-day processes of our clients’ engineering teams, helping them increase productivity and hit their product roadmap milestones faster and more predictably.

John Suvanto:

It sounds like your model doesn’t just focus on reducing costs but also on improving efficiency and scaling teams to meet business needs. For established tech companies or fast-growing startups, this must be very valuable. How do you ensure that this partnership remains scalable as the client’s business grows?

Luis Aburto:

Scalability is something we build into our engagements from the start. Tech companies, especially those that are experiencing rapid growth, need a development partner that can scale with them. With our nearshore model, we can quickly ramp up or adjust the size of the team based on the client’s needs. Because we’re working in close alignment with their internal teams, we can seamlessly integrate and expand without the growing pains that typically come with bringing in new resources.

Moreover, because we’re focused on outcomes and not just tasks, we’re always aligning our efforts with the client’s evolving goals. As their product grows or their market conditions change, we adapt to ensure that the partnership continues to deliver the results they need. This long-term focus allows us to grow with our clients, providing consistent, reliable support that evolves as their business does.

John Suvanto:

You mentioned cultural alignment as one of the advantages of nearshoring, and I’d like to dive deeper into that. For companies building long-term partnerships, cultural fit often determines the success of those relationships. How does Scio approach cultural alignment with your clients, and why do you think it’s so critical?

Luis Aburto:

Cultural alignment is one of the most important factors in ensuring a successful partnership, especially for long-term engagements. It goes beyond language or time zone—it’s about understanding how our clients operate, their values, and the expectations they set for their teams and their projects.

At Scio, we prioritize cultural alignment from the very beginning of our partnerships. Before we even start a project, we make an effort to really understand the business culture of our client. Are they highly collaborative? Do they prefer structured, process-driven work? What are their key priorities in terms of innovation, quality, or speed? Understanding these elements helps us better integrate with their internal teams. It’s not just about technical expertise, but about how we work together on a day-to-day basis.

This is where nearshoring really makes a difference. With our teams based in Mexico and LatAm, we share similar cultural norms with our US-based clients, which makes it easier to build rapport, communicate effectively, and establish a shared sense of purpose. We’re able to adapt quickly to the work environment and company culture of our clients, which minimizes friction and enhances collaboration.

John Suvanto:

That makes a lot of sense. Having cultural alignment must lead to smoother communication and better problem-solving since both teams are on the same page. How have you seen this play out in your engagements?

Luis Aburto:

We’ve seen it have a significant impact. For example, when teams are aligned culturally, there’s a level of trust and mutual respect that naturally develops. This means that when challenges arise—and they always do in software development—our clients know that we’re working with them, not just for them. We’re able to tackle problems more effectively because we’re communicating openly and in real-time, without the barriers that can come with different time zones or cultural differences.

In one particular case, we had a client who was scaling their product rapidly. Because we had established such a strong cultural fit with their internal teams, they felt confident leaning on us not just to execute development tasks but to co-create solutions. We were able to step in as a true partner, bringing ideas to the table that aligned with their product vision, and it allowed us to deliver value beyond what was initially scoped.

John Suvanto:

So that level of alignment becomes a foundation for innovation and collaboration. It sounds like it enables you to be more proactive in your role as a partner.

Luis Aburto:

Exactly. When there’s strong cultural alignment, we’re not just following instructions—we’re actively contributing to the client’s success. We understand their strategic goals, and that enables us to offer insights, suggest improvements, and even foresee potential challenges before they become problems. This is especially important for tech companies that need their development teams to move quickly and efficiently. When everyone is aligned, both technically and culturally, things just flow better.

John Suvanto:

It’s clear that Scio is positioning itself as more than just a service provider. You’re really becoming a strategic partner for your clients, especially in helping them navigate the complexities of scaling their product development efficiently. How do you approach building that long-term relationship with your clients?

Luis Aburto:

Our approach is centered around creating mutual value. From the outset, we look at the client’s long-term vision and figure out how we can help them achieve their most important objectives—not just for today, but as they grow. We’re constantly looking for ways to optimize processes, introduce innovations, and improve the efficiency of their engineering teams. By focusing on outcomes and delivering consistent value, we build a deep level of trust over time.
Additionally, because we’re working with high-growth tech companies, we understand that their needs will evolve. We make sure our teams are flexible, scalable, and always ready to pivot to meet new challenges. Our model allows us to stay agile while maintaining a clear focus on driving the results that matter most to the client.

John Suvanto:

That long-term focus is something many companies struggle with—keeping both the immediate needs and the future goals in balance. Luis, it’s been great to see how Scio is helping clients achieve that balance through strategic digital nearshoring and your Outcomes-Driven Engagement Model. As we close, what advice would you give to tech leaders who are considering adopting this kind of partnership approach?

Luis Aburto:

The most important thing is to start by thinking about what success looks like for your business—not just in terms of deliverables, but in terms of business impact. What outcomes do you need to achieve? Once you have a clear vision of that, find a partner who shares your commitment to those outcomes and is willing to share accountability for achieving them. Look for partners who are adaptable, aligned with your values, and able to scale with your needs. That’s what we strive to do at Scio, and it’s what makes these partnerships successful in the long run.

John Suvanto:

Luis, thank you for sharing your insights. It’s clear that Scio is bringing a lot of value to the table for tech companies looking to scale efficiently and achieve long-term success.

Luis Aburto:

Thank you, John. It’s always great to have these discussions, and I appreciate the opportunity to share more about our approach.

Building Your Dream Team: In-House vs. Nearshore Expansion

Building Your Dream Team: In-House vs. Nearshore Expansion

Building a high-performing engineering organization is one of the most consequential responsibilities for any CTO or technology leader. The team you assemble, nurture, and scale becomes the backbone of every roadmap commitment, release cycle, customer promise, and market opportunity. Yet, deciding how to grow that team is rarely straightforward.
Do you expand internally, with all the control and cultural familiarity of an in-house unit? Or do you supplement your capacity with a nearshore partner that can bring experienced engineers into your workflow quickly and cost-effectively?
These questions are even more pressing today. The demand for seasoned engineers in the U.S. continues to outpace supply, pushing companies to evaluate alternatives that keep velocity strong without compromising quality, security, or team cohesion. Nearshore expansion, particularly in regions closely aligned with U.S. business culture and time zones, has moved from a cost-saving experiment to a strategic growth model adopted by mid-market and enterprise engineering organizations.
Mexico, in particular, has become a preferred hub for U.S. tech companies. Strong cultural alignment, a thriving technology ecosystem, overlapping workdays, and a mature talent market make it one of the most practical nearshore destinations for sustained product development. For companies choosing partners rather than vendors, firms like Scio stand out for long-term collaboration, predictable performance, and engineering maturity.
This article breaks down the strategic, financial, and operational considerations behind in-house versus nearshore expansion. Each section explores the tradeoffs that matter most to engineering leaders tasked with delivering consistent output, protecting quality, and managing budgets responsibly.
By the end, you’ll have a clear framework to evaluate which approach best fits your organization’s goals and how a trusted nearshore partner can strengthen your engineering capacity with minimal friction.

The Cost Factor of In-House Teams vs. Nearshore Expansion

Building an in-house engineering team has undeniable advantages. You gain full control over hiring, culture, career paths, and day-to-day oversight. But the financial reality behind in-house hiring often surprises even experienced leaders, especially when the total cost of talent includes far more than salary alone.
The True Cost of an In-House Hire
The average cost per U.S. technical hire is estimated at around $4,000 in direct recruiting expenses. This figure excludes hidden overhead such as engineering leadership time spent interviewing, delayed delivery while positions remain open, onboarding costs, and salary premiums required to stay competitive in major markets.
Compensation packages in the U.S. represent a substantial share of operational budgets, with salaries and benefits accounting for roughly 70% of total labor expenses. And that percentage continues to climb as engineering compensation becomes more competitive nationwide.
Beyond headcount costs, organizations must account for:
Workspace, equipment, and software licensing

IT security infrastructure

HR, legal, and administrative overhead

Training and professional development

Retention programs to reduce turnover

Each of these commitments increases the long-term financial footprint of in-house hiring, making it a substantial investment not only at the moment of hire but over several years of lifecycle ownership.
Nearshore Teams: A Leaner Operating Model
Nearshore expansion offers a markedly different financial profile. Regions like Mexico provide access to strong engineering talent at a lower cost relative to the U.S., without the productivity challenges or communication barriers of offshore regions with wider cultural or time-zone gaps.
Nearshore benefits include:
Lower salary bands compared to major U.S. metros

Streamlined onboarding and faster time-to-productivity

Shared or included infrastructure (equipment, facilities, security)

Reduced overhead for HR, compliance, and long-term administration

No need to maintain physical workspace for additional headcount

Time-zone alignment enables real-time collaboration, reducing delays and back-and-forth cycles that introduce cost overruns in offshore models.
Infrastructure, Tools, and Long-Term Ownership
While in-house teams require continuous reinvestment in equipment, software, cloud resources, and workplace infrastructure, nearshore teams allow companies to avoid these recurring capital commitments. A nearshore partner typically absorbs infrastructure and operations costs, keeping the client’s spending focused on product development rather than workplace management.
When comparing the total cost of ownership (TCO), nearshore teams generally offer a more efficient and scalable financial structure, especially for organizations seeking rapid expansion or facing U.S. hiring constraints. This makes nearshore collaboration not just a cost advantage but a budget-stability advantage.

Advantages of Building a Nearshore Dream Team

Nearshore engineering teams are appealing not simply because they lower costs but because they allow organizations to expand intelligently. They help CTOs extend team capacity without sacrificing quality, communication velocity, or cultural alignment.
1. Labor Cost Advantages Without Cutting Corners
Nearshore markets offer compelling salary differences compared to the U.S. while still providing access to highly trained software engineers. Mexico, in particular, hosts a wide range of engineering talent with strong experience in enterprise systems, cloud transformation, DevOps, frontend frameworks, and QA automation.
Because these cost advantages come from economic differences rather than skill gaps, companies gain senior-level impact at a cost that would otherwise only cover mid-level talent locally.
2. Infrastructure Already in Place
Standing up an in-house development environment involves large and ongoing investments. Nearshore teams operate within pre-established facilities with reliable connectivity, licensed tools, and security protocols already configured.
This allows engineering leaders to:
Scale quickly without infrastructure bottlenecks

Maintain compliance with industry standards

Reduce operational complexity and IT overhead

Teams can begin contributing within days, not months, often a decisive benefit in organizations with aggressive roadmaps.
3. Built-In Training and Technical Development
Technology evolves quickly, and internal teams often require dedicated training cycles to stay current. When this training interrupts delivery, productivity takes a hit.
Most nearshore firms prioritize continuous skill development. Their engineers arrive with modern stacks, updated certifications, and training cycles already covered by the provider. The client gains access to a continually upskilled team without bearing the cost or time investment required to maintain that expertise internally.
4. Lower Total Cost of Ownership (TCO)
TCO is where the nearshore model becomes especially attractive. When evaluating salaries, infrastructure costs, onboarding, retention, and training, nearshore teams deliver high-quality engineering output at a materially lower cost structure.
Below is a simplified comparative module:

TCO Comparison: In-House vs. Nearshore

Cost Category
In-House Team
Nearshore Team
Salaries & Benefits Highest market rates Lower, stable cost structure
Infrastructure Company-funded offices, equipment, licenses Included by partner
Recruiting & Onboarding High cost and time investment Faster, partner-supported
Training Company-funded certifications & courses Provided by partner
Time Zone & Alignment Full overlap Full overlap (Mexico–U.S.)

Choosing the Scio Advantage

Deciding between in-house and nearshore expansion ultimately depends on the strategic needs of your engineering organization. Control, culture, quality, and long-term reliability matter just as much as cost structure. For many CTOs, the ideal model is a hybrid approach, where a trusted nearshore partner becomes an extension of the core team.
Scio has spent more than 21 years helping U.S. companies scale their development capabilities with engineering teams that are easy to work with and committed to delivering long-term value. Our approach centers on partnership rather than staff augmentation. We focus on alignment, communication, and integration so our engineers feel like part of your team from day one.
Why Engineering Leaders Choose Scio
1. Cultural and Operational Alignment
Mexican engineering culture blends naturally with U.S. product organizations. Shared workdays, communication style, agile fluency, and familiarity with North American business expectations reduce friction and accelerate output.
2. High-Performing Teams, Not Just Individuals
Scio’s model is designed for collaboration. Our engineers join clients’ daily workflows, standups, code reviews, and retrospectives. The result is consistency, accountability, and long-term knowledge retention.
3. Streamlined Onboarding and Faster Ramp-Up
We help clients add capacity without disrupting existing workflows. Engineers join with the tools, onboarding guidance, and technical context they need to deliver quickly.
4. Long-Term Stability and Low Turnover
One of the biggest risks in modern engineering teams is churn. Scio’s retention rates consistently outperform industry averages, giving clients long-term continuity in their codebases and processes.
5. A Partner Focused on Growth and Trust
Our mission is simple:
Provide high-performing nearshore software engineering teams that are easy to work with
This philosophy shapes everything we do, from recruitment and mentorship to delivery and account management.
A Scalable, Strategic Extension of Your Team
For organizations seeking to strengthen delivery without losing control or quality, Scio offers a practical, proven model. We help engineering leaders expand confidently, maintain momentum, and focus on product priorities instead of talent acquisition challenges.

FAQ

In-House vs Nearshore Engineering – FAQs

How engineering leaders evaluate when to hire in-house, when to nearshore, and how Scio approaches long-term collaboration.

In-house roles are ideal when your product requires deep institutional knowledge, long-term strategic ownership, or close cross-department collaboration that benefits from physical proximity and constant context.

Yes. The quality gap often associated with offshore models does not apply to nearshore regions like Mexico, where technical education, engineering culture, and agile practices closely align with U.S. standards.

Most nearshore engineers begin contributing within days to a couple of weeks, depending on codebase complexity, documentation quality, and access to tools and environments.

Scio prioritizes long-term partnerships, cultural alignment, engineering maturity, and seamless integration with client workflows. The objective is stable, predictable collaboration—not transactional outsourcing.

Leading from Both Sides of the Keyboard: When CTOs Hold the Purse Strings

Leading from Both Sides of the Keyboard: When CTOs Hold the Purse Strings

For most software leaders, navigating the world of technology is already a demanding feat. But for a select few, the challenge extends beyond lines of code and elegant algorithms. These are the CTOs who also wear the CEO hat, balancing technical vision with the realities of financial stewardship. They’re a rare breed, and their unique perspective offers valuable insights for both aspiring leaders and those seeking the right nearshore development partner.

For a CTO-CEO, it’s a constant dance between two worlds. Their days are a blend of crafting robust architectures and scrutinizing budgets. Imagine building the future one algorithm at a time, while keeping a keen eye on the bottom line. It’s a high-wire act, demanding both meticulous planning and a healthy dose of calculated risk.

But when done right, the synergy is undeniable. Technical agility meets financial prudence in a potent mix. Decisions become laser-focused, aligning development goals with budgetary constraints. The CEO’s deep understanding of technology fosters empathy with teams, leading to a collaborative and efficient environment. Innovation flourishes when the architect of the code also holds the keys to the castle.

Think of Microsoft’s remarkable resurgence under Satya Nadella’s leadership. His ascent from software engineer to CEO wasn’t just a climb up the corporate ladder; it was a strategic move that fueled Microsoft’s transformation. Nadella’s fluency in both code and commerce allowed him to see the immense potential of cloud computing and AI, guiding the company to refocus its efforts and reclaim its position as a tech leader. His story is a testament to the power of having a CEO who speaks the language of both engineers and investors.

Collaborative Efficiency

Collaborative Efficiency

Imagine software development teams where code whispers directly to the CEO’s ear, where budgets aren’t just spreadsheets but blueprints for innovation. Companies with Brain CTO-CEOs, according to industry reports and internal case studies, report a remarkable 30% increase in employee engagement among engineering teams. Why? Improved communication bridges the gap between developers and leadership, fostering mutual understanding and trust. It’s like having a translator who speaks both the language of code and the dialect of the boardroom, ensuring everyone is on the same page throughout the development journey. This enhanced collaboration reduces friction, quicker decision-making, and a shared sense of purpose, ultimately leading to a happier, more productive workforce.

Faster Time-to-Market

In today’s hyper-competitive landscape, speed is king. Studies like the Harvard Business Review study highlight the advantage of dual-focused leadership. Companies with leaders who juggle code and cash are 45% more likely to successfully launch new products on time and within budget. No more missed deadlines or ballooning costs! The CTO-CEO’s understanding of both technical feasibility and financial constraints becomes a potent weapon, guiding teams to hit the market not just with groundbreaking ideas, but also with optimal timing and financial prudence.

Navigating the Challenges

Navigating the Challenges

The journey for CTO-CEOs is one of constant balancing. They must keep pushing for innovation while ensuring financial stability. It’s not always smooth sailing, and there are tough decisions to be made along the way.

For example, investing in tomorrow’s AI breakthrough might conflict with the need to optimize existing infrastructure today. And while exciting new technologies are tempting, staying within budget and resource constraints is crucial. Finding the right balance can be challenging, requiring careful consideration to avoid prioritizing innovation at the expense of financial responsibility.

Here are some specific balancing acts CTO-CEOs face:

  • Avoiding «shiny object syndrome»: It’s important to evaluate if the latest tech trend aligns with long-term goals before pursuing it.
  • Making smart «build vs. buy» decisions: Choosing between internal development and external solutions requires careful weighing of cost and benefits.
  • Embracing the «innovation paradox»: Breakthroughs are important, but so are stability and reliability in existing systems.
  • Solving the «people puzzle»: Finding talent with both cutting-edge skills and operational efficiency is key.

These are just a few of the challenges CTO-CEOs navigate. Understanding these complexities is crucial for steering their companies toward sustainable growth.

Scio: Partnering for Sustainable Growth with a CEO-CTO Mindset

Scio Partnering for Sustainable Growth with a CEO-CTO Mindset

We understand the unique challenges of navigating technology and business as a CTO-CEO. That’s because our leadership embodies this very perspective. Our CEO, Luis Aburto, is not just a seasoned executive; he’s also a passionate engineer at heart.

This dual perspective is the cornerstone of Scio’s approach. We’ve seen firsthand how combining technical brilliance with strategic financial foresight unlocks the potential for stable growth, smart innovation, and empowered teams. We’re not about quick fixes or fleeting trends; we’re about building long-lasting success alongside you.

Luis Aburto’s passion for both software development and entrepreneurship is woven into the very fabric of Scio. He built this company with a singular mission: to empower tech companies to bring their software ideas to life, faster and better. This deep understanding of your world informs everything we do.

That means:

  • Finding the right talent: We handpick top-tier tech professionals in Mexico and Latin America, meticulously vetted for both technical excellence and cultural fit.
  • Managing costs effectively: We leverage our experience and global resources to optimize your project pipelines and maximize your budget impact.
  • Creating a thriving tech environment: We foster a collaborative culture where your teams feel empowered to innovate and build amazing things.

Scio isn’t just a team of consultants; we’re your strategic partner, guided by the CEO-CTO mindset of Luis Aburto. We walk alongside you, understanding your unique needs, budget realities, and vision for the future. Together, we’ll turn your passion for technology into sustainable growth, one line of code at a time.

Together We Build: The CTO-CEO’s Collaborative Journey

Together We Build The CTO-CEO's Collaborative Journey

The journey of the CTO-CEO is rarely a solo endeavor. It’s a shared journey fueled by the combined efforts of engineers, developers, and countless others. It’s a reminder that even the sharpest minds need a team to translate ideas into reality. And perhaps that’s the true strength of the CTO-CEO: to foster an environment where diverse skills come together in a collaborative dance, building something bigger than themselves.

As Nicholas Negroponte wisely said, «Technology alone solves nothing. It’s the way we use it that matters.» The CTO-CEO understands this deeply. In their hands, technology isn’t just lines of code; it’s a bridge connecting people, a springboard for growth, and a canvas for shaping a better future. Their legacy isn’t just the product they deliver, but the way they unite a group of talented individuals towards a shared goal.

Moving forward, let’s remember that the key to unlocking technology’s true potential lies not just in individual brilliance, but in working together. Let’s be inspired by the CTO-CEO who encourages collaboration, not competition, and celebrates the harmony that arises when diverse voices join forces. Together, we can build a brighter future, united in strategy, and empowered to achieve.

What Is The Meaning Of True “Craftsmanship” In Software Development?

What Is The Meaning Of True “Craftsmanship” In Software Development?

Curated by: Sergio A. Martínez

Craftsmanship is timeless, being an integral practice to human history since the dawn of our species. It represents a quality of uniform excellence, often characterized by removing unnecessary elements from a design and bringing out the best in the crafted object. And although craftsmanship is often associated with aesthetic pursuits like painting or sculpture, its importance goes beyond; it serves as a powerful reminder of the value of hard work and skilled ‘hands-on’ effort, a notion that helps us tap into our creativity and realize our ambitions. Mastering craftsmanship, therefore, is not only a source of motivation but also a means to change our current place for the better.

The craftsmanship of software development 4

And considering how technology is the biggest agent of change in our world, it might be interesting to find out if the idea of craftsmanship has a place in this modern computer-driven reality. Is there craftsmanship to be found in software development? After all, programming consists of a combination of hard skills, innovative techniques, and a love for constantly perfecting processes that translate into high-quality products. It can be said that developers practice a craftsmanship approach in every project, taking pride in the details and focusing on making changes that have a clear impact on performance, stability, scalability, and many other aspects of development. 

However, for most people, it’s easy to overlook the art behind software development, but the craftsmanship is present in every little task. From developing feature-rich designs and diagrams to writing clean and error-free code, the job of a software developer involves multiple levels of precision and detail that demand proper diligence. A well-crafted software is an accomplishment, just as a well-crafted painting or sculpture would be, with each step involving thoughtfulness, attention to detail, and careful consideration. There’s an almost creative element to writing software since developers must find ways to solve programming puzzles with innovative ideas and stylish solutions, so designers must have some artistic understanding of how users interact with technology. Nonetheless, this approach must coexist with the demands of an industry that is always moving forward, making today’s software development an incredibly ingenious and complex task that must always rise to the challenge.

The balance between craftsmanship and business

The craftsmanship of software development 4

Crafting software is an attempt to capture a responsive balance between the idealistic embrace of artistic virtue and the practical needs of a business environment. On one hand, developers want to use their creativity to build something meaningful that reflects a sense of usefulness and long-lasting quality. On the other hand, there are ever-present realities that require careful decisions about timelines and budget, and finding harmony between these factors while developing software can be hard to navigate. However, it’s by solving this creative tension that developers ultimately can create elegantly well-rounded solutions.

Still, it’s no small feat: both angles need to be taken into consideration when pursuing a successful project. It takes careful forethought, planning, and collaboration from everyone involved (developers, project managers, stakeholders, etc.) to prioritize craftsmanship over profit while still satisfying the business demands. The biggest challenge here is maintaining quality while meeting time and budget constraints; if a product is rushed out the door too soon or neglected too long, users will pay the price with buggy applications or poor feature implementation, so it’s important to have an experienced team of professionals who understand their collective responsibility to craft perfect software while keeping in mind all other key objectives.

As we have already mentioned, the importance of craftsmanship in software development can often be overlooked. It’s easy to rush through a project to meet a deadline and sacrifice quality, but this doesn’t end well in the long run. Quality software is efficient, minimizing user frustration and increasing overall productivity, and crafting robust software requires an investment of time and thought that demands an eye for details both big and small. High-quality craftsmanship requires rigorous testing before deployment, as well as regular updates after implementation to ensure maximum efficiency at all times. In other words, software craftsmanship may involve an initial extra effort, but it pays off by creating an outstanding user experience for years.

Thus, craftsmanship is an idea that one should take care of and pride in when writing code. Being a software craftsman involves learning, understanding, and researching best practices to write amazing code, with a developer constantly asking themselves questions such as: are there better ways to refactor this piece of code? How can I make this easier to maintain? Is there an accepted design pattern that I could use here? By taking the time to ask these questions themselves, developers can ensure that their software is of higher quality and more robust than it otherwise would be, the result of putting your knowledge, dedication, experience, and passion for problem-solving at the forefront. Craftsmanship in software development requires attention to detail, continual refinement from iteration to iteration, and an interest in learning new technologies for their work and aims for excellence when building quality products.

Craftsmanship at every level

The craftsmanship of software development 4

True craftsmanship in software development can be seen in its intricate details. Developers who take their time to create their projects with a focus on the elegance of style and precision when producing games, websites, or applications that stand out from the crowd. Crafting a piece of software to be efficient and durable takes skill and talented developers to understand the importance of meeting user expectations, and making sure their work lives up to those standards by adding creative touches wherever possible. Part art, part science—true craftsmanship in software development makes the difference between an ordinary application and one that really shines when developers care about…

  • Writing clean and maintainable code: Craftsmen developers strive to write code that is easy to read, understand, and maintain over time. This means using meaningful variable names, avoiding duplication, and following established coding standards.
  • Building scalable software: Good software craftsmen know how to design and build software systems that can scale to meet the needs of a growing user base. This means understanding how to distribute workloads across multiple machines and designing software with horizontal scaling in mind.
  • Emphasizing testing: Crafting software means placing a strong emphasis on testing. Developers who practice craftsmanship ensure that their code is thoroughly tested and they use automated testing tools to make sure that any changes they make to the code do not break existing functionality.
  • Being efficient with code: A software craftsman understands the importance of being efficient with code. They know that every line of code that they write has an impact on the overall performance of the application, so they strive to write code that is as lean and efficient as possible.
  • Continuous improvement: Finally, software craftsmen are always looking for ways to improve their skills and the quality of their work. They stay up-to-date with the latest tools and techniques, and they are always looking for ways to improve their code and their processes.

In short, software development is an ever-evolving understanding of how coding works and communicates with different systems. By developing software, coders, and engineers are constantly pushing the boundaries of what can be done, learning from a variety of sources, and tackling complex tasks in efficient ways. It’s hard work, but the craftsmanship exhibited within can be extremely rewarding, as it offers an opportunity to create something useful and marketable that solves a problem or makes life easier for everyone. By continuously pushing their own boundaries of excellence, software developers are able to develop projects that achieve unprecedented levels of quality while ensuring usability and scalability. It’s this iterative approach that separates the best software projects from those just good enough—and it’s the commitment to continuous improvement and craftsmanship exhibited by software developers that allow users to seamlessly interact with highly sophisticated products.

The Key Takeaways

  • When it comes to software development, the value of craftsmanship cannot be overstated; creativity and artistry are critical for any successful piece of software out there.
  • What craftsmanship provides is an inspiration to always become better, strive for a better result, and grow new skills and talents that will result in a more positive outcome for any project.
  • However, finding the balance between craftsmanship and the business needs of the organization can be tricky, and must be navigated carefully.
  • Craftsmanship is found at every level of a development project, and the best developers will take it seriously to build the best possible product at the end.