Building on the discussion of distributed agile-scrum teams in software development we started in the first post in this series, in this post we will discuss some of the principle technical best practices our team at Scio has found to be beneficial for distributed agile teams.
Communications for Distributed Agile Teams
One of the most important areas to consider technically is the use of flexible instant messaging platforms. While these platforms cannot fully replace face-to-face interaction in all cases (especially for first-time encounters), they can go a long way toward building the trust and open relationships that are expected in an agile environment. They must be flexible enough to adapt to a wide range of network speeds and requirements while providing text chat, file transfer, desktop/app share, voice, and video interaction. This requires an understanding of the available bandwidth at each location included in the project, technical constraints of the end user environment, and fallbacks that can be used when the normal application doesn’t function correctly for some reason. Messaging tools must be as «transparent» as possible – not creating extra overhead for ad-hoc meetings that are necessary to iron out important details on the fly, while still providing some extra tools that smooth interaction in larger meetings like side-channel text chats. It may seem trivial to simply adopt one of the many tools available for the purpose, but in practice, finding something that can be widely adopted and quickly brought into daily use is more challenging than you might think. Issues to consider include:
Messaging security – Some industries (such as health care) and some projects may require security over and above that provided by the messaging application itself.
Standards – Special situations may require some standards or rules of the road for users and in a lot of cases, enforced rules may be the easiest route to providing compliance for issues like branding, copyright, and industry compliance. This can be especially important when desktop sharing is used – are there areas in users systems that should not be shared for some reason?
Special needs users – Are there users on the team that require or could benefit from voice to text (rather than keyboard) interaction? Is video easier for some users? It is better to find a platform that provides options for special needs rather than trying to build in workarounds after the fact.
Availability – There is nothing worse than a messaging system no one takes seriously. If it needs to be tucked away, if it is only used when «planned for,» if there is no response when it is needed to answer a critical question, it is just another bit of project overhead and not a useful communication tool. If everyone does not adopt the same tool – much the same is true. This is really not a technical issue, it is more organizational in nature, but it is a waste of time to implement a special system no one is using. Make it part of the agreements in the project kickoff – and use it.
And one additional tool that is indispensable for communications – a camera. It can be as simple as using a smartphone, but having a way to capture white boards, project artifacts and even selfies of team members can be invaluable to bring everyone to the «same page» quickly and to act as a project memory in future interactions or to bring missing members up to speed. It seems like a small point, but if you only think of photos after the fact – it will be too late.
Project Management, Testing and Source Control
Deciding on the project management tools to be used (or not used) during the initial planning session is critical to success. The actual tool used may depend on the standards adopted by the client team before the project starts or they may depend on the type of project involved. Regardless, they must be network-based (so everyone sees the same project status without forcing updates), agile-scrum aware (backlog, burndown charts, etc.), and easy to adopt without a great deal of unnecessary overhead. Another point to consider – can individuals take responsibility for stories and status transparently? Can they update their status as a part of their regular work? For this reason, we use the Team Foundation Server as an integrated part of our Visual Studio environment as a standard. It has agile templates built in and allows individuals to manage their work as part of their development environment. No jumping out to another application. Of course, that said, we do adapt Trello for shorter projects and smaller teams. The right tool for the job is always important to consider.
Today, testing automation, continuous integration, and standardized configuration management are not just good ideas, they should be standard for every project. That said, access and availability for members of a distributed agile team is an important technical hurdle to solve immediately at the start of the project. Along with rules (more on that in the next article in this series) to push early and often rather than «once in a while» it is a critical element of any team environment – especially for distributed teams. It is not something you can easily back into «when you decide it is needed.» It requires consideration for implementation, training and the processes that will be used. Again, this is a subject to be fully discussed in the project kickoff, regardless of who is implementing and using the systems. A single code repository with logging enforced will go a long way toward understanding clearly where the team is and what is really complete at any stage. Again, this isn’t just a best practice for distributed agile teams – all development teams should be regularly using these tools so there is little to no time required to reach productivity with them.
One more thing? Clocks on the wall, for each part of the distributed team, with labels. It seems simple – but when you need to reach someone before they leave for the day – it can make all the difference.
Wiki?
It might seem trivial, but a networked team wiki with space for sharing assets, current status (including builds, etc.), coming meetings, etc. can make all the difference to both communication and «personalizing» interactions between team members. A project wiki can include:
Project wiki with procedures, contact lists, learning during development, editable spring plans, project artifacts (photos, documents) both up to date and historical.
Team member profiles with photos, fun facts, recent changes, etc.
Photos and notes from casual and social team meetings (games, lunches, etc.)
Hours, holidays by location, agreed core team core hours and days when all team members will be available.
Each individual project may have additional technical issues that have to be considered, but this is the starting point we use to consider the set up for every project. In the next segment of this series, we will consider the organizational issues involved in adapting the agile-scrum framework to distributed agile teams. Stay tuned!
Did you come to the party late? You can find the first article of this series here
Practices required for distributed teams: Basically Agile (and Scrum!)
The use of the agile methodology in combination with the Scrum framework is a widely accepted industry standard for software development throughout the world. Together the methodologies provide an iterative and collaborative system that has been proven to be adaptable and resilient over a wide range of implementations by teams in the industry.
What makes the combination of these methodologies so attractive and useful in the development of software?
An adaptable framework for iterative software development that provides the customer working software for evaluation in regular, short increments.
The ability to deal with incomplete or fluctuating product development concepts during the process of development in a way that allows discovery and adjustment as needed.
The project team includes formal roles and responsibilities for both the client, development team and each individual in decision making during the development process.
The inclusion of systems for communication, trust, and collaboration across the entire product development team.
Recognition that the availability of team members for consultation during core working hours is critical to the iterative production process to assure alignment and to allow adjustment as needed.
The production process includes regular daily meetings, as well as meetings for production assessment and planning that are focused on understanding the status of committed work, clearing production obstacles, and making adjustments where necessary to achieve goals the team has committed to accomplish.
Outcomes that have proven to be beneficial to both the client and the development team in the development of successful software applications.
Of course, if you dig into the implementation details of agile and scrum for software development, you will find a number of additional benefits. Each team and project can and does adapt the processes within the framework to fit the constraints of their situation. But with the focus on real-time collaboration and face-to-face interaction, what happens when circumstances combine to require the use of agile and scrum across a team that is distributed across geography? Can the agile-scrum framework be adapted to a distributed team? That is the focus of this five-part series – Best Practices for Distributed Agile Teams.
Adapting Agile & Scrum to a Distributed Team
With the availability of broadband network access across the Internet, as well as the benefits and pressures provided by a global marketplace and workforce – it is critical that the benefits of the agile – scrum framework can be both adapted and scaled to provide their benefits to distributed teams. For the purposes of this series, we will consider any team that has members who are not physically in the same location during core working hours, they are distributed. That could mean the team is spread across a metropolitan area where colocation is both time-consuming and expensive or the team is spread across a wider area – across states or national borders.
The business advantages of opening horizons for software development by distributed teams are relatively obvious:
A distributed model brings a wider field of skills and expertise into play, often with lower costs.
Varied experience in both technology and problem-solving can bring more answers to the table with a lower cost of recruitment and faster fulfillment of specialized requirements
Entire teams can be sourced with less time, training and deeper experience in leveraging agile-scrum for software and product development.
The scenarios for distributed development can include:
Development team together in a development center with
Client in a different location, same time zone
Client in different location and time zone
Split development team
The development team is split between locations or combined with a client team in another location or both
Same time zones or different time zones
Various combinations – split client team, outside consultants, single team members remotely located
Continuity is Key
Regardless of where the client is, adaption to a distributed agile – scrum model is critical to ensure the involvement of key stakeholders, development and product teams and to achieve the benefits of the framework in projects. In fact, at Scio, we have found that consideration and inclusion of the practices required for distributed teams are critical to all our software development projects – whether they are considered to be «distributed» or not. We have found:
Using the practices required for distributed teams provides a more scalable base for all software development teams.
If distributed team practices are not in the standard agile repertoire:
New projects that require a distributed team have a longer ramp to productivity because team members have to adapt to new tools and practices.
Projects face a higher risk because situational adaptions selected by teams may not be proven and optimal.
Teams may have to spend many cycles dealing with organizational issues to reach full productivity.
So, from our experience – adaptations of the agile-scrum methodology and framework to allow a distributed team environment is just good practice. They bring many benefits, including better communication, formalized technical environments, and organizational adaptions. They are a critical part of our work environment and our commitment to our clients.
During the following four parts of this series, we will explore some of the best practices Scio has found to be beneficial for distributed teams and some of the myths that we find are common when the idea is considered by organizations. We hope you will stay with us because there is a lot to know about leveraging a distributed team environment successfully for software development.
It has always been said that the kind of members you take in your team determines the success rate of a project. This is true for software developers, especially because completing a project takes a lot of time, money, and energy.
The Agile Manifesto started in 2001. It addressed the growing problem of software development where the process of creating and building projects took years, or worse, were left unfinished.
Before the agile software development methodology came about, software projects have been delayed or have cost more than its budget. During that time, meeting the client’s requirements was really difficult. Software development teams then were using the traditional Waterfall methodology to manage their projects and keep track of their progress. However, this methodology has flaws that made it harder for software engineers to finish their projects.
Agile has made it easier and more convenient for both the developers and clients. It works like a software development life cycle, following phases where developers manage each phase. It allows each stage to be altered, adjusted, or enhanced.
The cycle goes from system planning, requirement analysis, designing, and coding to the last phase of system testing. Since the project goes through these phases, it is important that members of an agile team work closely and collaboratively with one another. But what really makes a great Agile software development team?
Good Communication and coordination
Because agile methodology requires each member of the team to work on each phase of the cycle, good communication must be practiced all throughout the software development process. A great and successful agile team is able to share and contribute ideas with each other. It is also important that everyone is able to express themselves very well, such as when encountering a problem, asking for help or assistance, or taking the initiative to share new ideas or suggestions. Communication is vital in the process because everyone in the team needs to know the progress of the project at every stage. Good communication results in a well-coordinated project.
Leadership
This does not only apply to the team leaders or managers but also to everyone who is part of the team. Members lead and take responsibility in each of the project phases. The project will not be completed unless it has gone through the necessary stages, so this also means that it will not be completed if one member does not do their part.
Moreover, an agile team has proper organization and a balanced distribution of tasks. This helps make the transition of the project from one phase to another faster and smoother. Agile team members should know and understand their roles in the project to be able to perform their tasks and provide what is needed of them. It is also important that members know their strengths and weaknesses, so they can work on them together.
Empowerment
One important factor in agile development is the empowerment and autonomy given to each team member. People can achieve their goals because they are motivated properly and because they can freely explore and develop their skills.
Since agile development allows transparency and collaboration, agile teams also work based on trust. They have to trust one another because they need each other to complete the project. This trust can be expressed through consistent empowerment. Everyone in the team must consistently allow each member to work and own their parts, roles, and responsibilities. This soon leads to providing mutual support to one another and to assisting those who are having a hard time.
Dedication and Unity
All tasks require dedication, especially when bringing a software project to completion. This means that members of the agile team are hardworking and do not give up easily on the project. They have vision not only for themselves but for the team and the project as well. They are willing to adapt to different people and different situations, and they are open to growth and improvement.
Dedication also means working as a group where the success of one is the success of all. Members work together towards one goal and one objective.
Conclusion
Successful software development projects are often created by groups of individuals who dedicate their time and energy to solving and improving the features of the program that they are working on.
Great Agile Software Development Teams play a major role in the success or failure of software development projects. Although the team leader makes the most important contributions, it should be noted that everyone in the team is responsible for the completion of specific parts of the project, making it whole. With that, picking the right team members is something that should be taken seriously.
If you want to work with a great agile team that will ensure the successful completion of your project, visit Contact Us for more information. We can help!
Now we just want to ask you, if you can share this blog post on your social networks to reach people who might need or are looking for our help. It is very simple, just click on any of the buttons below. Thank you!
Outsourcing is a standard practice in the software development industry and it continues to experience steady growth, year after year. Among the common drivers cited are lowering costs of outsourcing, rapid acquisition of skilled resources, and avoiding staff overhead for one-time projects that would result in layoffs after completion.
In other words – it is all about costs in one way or another, whether they are real expenses or lost opportunities because you could not bring together a new team for a project in time to achieve your market. But, when you have paid the invoices and implemented your new application, what is on your balance sheet? Did you really save the money you thought you would? Are there hidden costs that have drained all the benefits out of the engagement?
10 hidden costs of outsourcing you may not be considering (in no particular order):
#1 – Deciding that driving cost to the lowest level possible is your primary goal
Are you confused? If outsourcing is all about costs, how can it be that using lower costs as your primary reason for outsourcing would actually end up costing you more?
The lowest cost vendor cannot also be the best equipped with the best resources, deep expertise, strong cultural fit, high reliability and excellent real-time communications in your language. Solving each of the issues mentioned has a cost to the vendor, during the contract period or before to find, train, and maintain the necessary resources. Pushing to the lowest possible costs will require trade-offs that you and your team will bear. You may be able to anticipate the cost of working with less experienced and less independent resources at a production level, but can you also judge the costs that could come when unexpected issues arise? Have you ever experienced a project without unexpected issues? Really?
Often, when price is the primary driver, the service buyer decides to manage costs by requiring a fixed-price bid. The upside is the risk is placed on the outsourcing vendor. To mitigate their risks, the vendor will then require extensive documentation, a detailed waterfall-type project plan that leaves acceptance testing to the end of the project, and penalties or prolonged negotiation if changes are needed. Plus, to pad for risk, the vendor will actually increase their bid because they know that fixed-price engagements rarely finish on time and within budget. In addition, they may decide to use less experienced resources (lower cost) overseen by senior resources (high cost, but with little time to look deeply into design and coding issues), So, in the end, instead of gaining assurance the project will end on time with an expected cost, the buyer has more cost for upfront specifications, more risk the final application will meet specifications as written but fail to achieve its goals, and much less oversight and flexibility once the project begins. The vendor will manage to the contract requirements and not the business goals their client decided were important internally. The vendor takes the entire responsibility for cost control, quality assurance, and management. In most cases, this means if their timeline or costs get out of line, quality control and communication between the development team and the client team will suffer.
If your primary driver is cost, you will probably be pushed to offshore resources that are very low cost but have difficulty making their teams available in real time to collaborate with your team, lack good communication skills in your language and little in common with your culture. In these cases, you will have to do what you can to mitigate the fact that 28% of projects fail because of communication issues and 16% fail because of poor cultural matches.
#2 – The cost of selecting a vendor
Few buyers have a budget for selecting an outsourcing vendor and if they do, they rarely allow for the work that would really contribute to successful projects and relationships.
Up-front requirements and bidding document preparation. In order to assure all vendors provide comparable bids, considerable time needs to be spent, by your in-house team specifying both the project and the vendor requirements. If a number of non-compliant or non-comparable bids are returned, what is the cost of going back to the vendor with more details and allowing other vendors to update their bids with what is perhaps new information or different assumptions for them? The hourly cost of internal staff, consultants or both add up but are often not counted in the final project analysis.
Time and opportunity costs. Depending on the value of the project, the vendor selection process can take 4 months to a year. This includes selecting the vendor pool, preparing documents, sending, receiving and reviewing documents, negotiating and preparing contracts, demonstrations, travel to selected vendors, and more.
Travel costs. To properly evaluate final round vendors for a strategic project, it is imperative that is spent at the data center or workplace of the vendor team to assure that practices and conditions match expectations. The greater the distance, the greater the actual costs and the time required for travel. Typical round-trip times to India and Asian locations are two to three weeks depending on the goals and number of vendors to be visited.
#3 Project initiation
The costs of project initiation have an inverse relationship with project risk. The less you spend on project initiation, bringing the teams together, assessing process and methodology, assuring communication, respect, and team collaboration is strong, and that there is a shared understanding of project goals, the greater the risk that the project will fail. But even knowing this simple fact, most vendors and buyers will decide to cut the project initiation phase in favor of «getting to productive coding» quickly. The downside of this choice is a longer time to reach full productivity, more risk of rework to meet expectations, and increased costs for project oversight and team management.
#4 Staff transition
When a new outsourcing team is started on a project, internal staff is often given new roles as part of the initiative. They could be tasked as product owners, to oversee user story development, to run internal quality and acceptance testing, or to assure that questions that cannot be handled directly by the internal product team are handled quickly by the right subject matter experts. If the outsourced team cannot work during the standard workday of the client team, the daily schedules of the internal team may have to be shifted drastically. Their existing roles and responsibilities will need to be handed off or reprioritized to allow them the time to handle their new work and the task switching that invariably occurs. The costs of transition (and retraining in the case of those that may be new to methodologies like agile) are rarely considered in project costs but in reality, if they are not allowed for, the resulting issues can be very costly.
#5 Infrastructure & operations realignment
Inevitably, a new outsourcing project will incur changes in local infrastructure and software development operations. The changes may include new virtual environments, changes to internal processes for continuous integration, automated testing, security and authentication, incremental releases to production or many other issues. Again, part of this falls to poorly planned project initiation, but even with upfront time focused on team cohesion and user stories, the requirements for infrastructure and operations are often overlooked. When they are, count on additional costs because of lowered productivity as issues are ironed out and everyone gets on the same page.
#6 Contract & relationship management
Throughout the project, the buyer/client-side project manager needs to assure that incremental payments match the effort spent and the deliverables received as well as the necessary progress toward completion. Not spending enough time on this aspect of the project can result in very tough negotiations if the project goes off track or unexpected issues arise. In addition, selecting the right project model, whether it is fixed price, time and materials, dedicated team or another variation, has a big impact on this area. A lack of trust and understanding or lack of partner-level communication during the project can make a project very hard to manage to a successful conclusion and very costly when issues must be resolved.
#7 Cultural & organizational alignment
It may seem like a «soft» issue, but if the outsourced team and vendor cannot navigate your cultural norms and organizational environment it is likely to make project management very difficult. Bringing a team from a hierarchical culture into an organization with a flat structure can be very disorienting to team members with different expectations for interaction and responsibility. Merging a small team into an enterprise system with many silos and layers of control can be very difficult. The new team in either case will require additional time to reach full productivity and oversight to ensure they can fully participate as expected – and has a real cost.
#8 Intermediaries
To mitigate many of the issues in this list, outsourcing vendors and buyers often impose intermediaries on projects as an extra layer of «assurance.» This imposes two extra layers of cost on a project: The direct cost of the extra labor required and the indirect cost from the risk incurred when developers, product owners and subject matter experts do not regularly engage in project discussions directly. Every time an intermediary becomes involved, there is a loss of fidelity and clarity. In the end, instead of assuring better communication, the sides are pulled into a «blame-game» when issues are not fully explored or questions are «translated, collated and summarized.»
#9 Technologies
The selection of technologies for a new project can have significant impact on project and application success. If the internal team restricts choices because of a lack of understanding and confidence in the options offered by the outsourcing team, if a lack of communication results in a poor understanding of risk and downsides of technologies selected, or if choices are avoided to keep from exposing a lack of awareness – the downsides can be very hard to overcome. They can raise «technical debt» to a degree that limits options «down the road» in the project or the application lifecycle and lower team cohesion to the point that trust and communication are lost completely.
#10 Location, location, location
To a degree, we’ve covered this already in the sense that work time overlaps, cultural fit, and communication issues can cause project costs to rise significantly. But on its own, the location of the outsourcing team in relation to the client team should be a part of vendor selection, a factor in project initiation, and a major concern from the beginning of any outsourcing relationship. The greater the geographic distance between the teams, the greater the issues will be. Mitigation costs, in general, will increase including travel, working hour adjustment, intermediaries, communication, contract management, etc. While considering nearshore vendors will not eliminate all outsourcing risks and issues, they can make other choices much easier to deal with and diminish risks significantly if they have the right resources and ability to work at a partner level with your team.
Outsourcing can save you time and money, but only if it’s done correctly. With so many factors to consider, it’s important that you do your research before making any decisions. The 10 points above are a great starting point – but there are still more software development costs to think about, such as marketing development costs and advertising expenses. By taking the time to understand all of the possible hidden costs associated with outsourcing, you can be sure that you’re not overspending on your project.
Scio is a nearshore vendor of software development services for our clients in North America. We tune our project model to the project at hand and operate with our clients at a partner level to lower risk on both sides. If you would like to discuss your next project and the options we can offer, please contact us. We would be happy to work with you.
In one sense or another, we’ve all heard the term «body shop.» In the world of automobiles and mechanics, it refers to a shop that repairs or modifies car bodies, but in software development, it refers to outsourcing vendors who use contract labor to fill their requirements. Let’s say at the outset, this isn’t an inherently bad practice. Many, if not most, larger vendors started out as body shops (0r temporary staffing providers – another similar term) and eventually grew beyond the practice. There are many well-established vendors who are essentially filling the place of in-house recruiters and have a network of contractors they have used repeatedly that make the process of filling short-term needs an easy job for their clients.
But, the problems start when an outsourcing vendor doesn’t disclose their business model and you assume from their website or on the basis of a phone call that they are offering a team for a software development project that has a full-service house behind it.
What’s the difference?
In most cases, a full-service outsourcing provider can offer:
Body Shop vs Full-Service Partner: What’s the Difference?
Here’s a quick comparison between body shops and full-service nearshore providers:
Aspect
Body Shop
Full-Service Nearshore Partner
Business Model
Staff augmentation, quick placements
Strategic partnerships, end-to-end delivery
Team Composition
Freelancers or contractors
In-house, trained, full-time staff
Project Oversight
You manage everything
They manage planning, execution, and delivery
Scalability
Limited, ad-hoc
Flexible team scaling, access to bench
Security & Infrastructure
Minimal, often remote setups
Managed environments, secure protocols, full DevOps support
Ideal For
Short-term needs, one-off tasks
Long-term products, team extension, complex app development
In-house staff – Trained, supported, and backed by an organizational structure that includes infrastructure, formal methodologies, processes, and benefits that promote success and staff longevity.
Organizational-level expertise in technology, verticals, project planning and initiation, risk management, automated testing, and other areas that make their teams more robust and create a better opportunity for project success.
The ability to shift quickly to fill a team role if a resource becomes unable to finish a project for some reason. Generally, established vendors have some «bench» – resources not fully committed to existing projects that can step in when needed. Because the technologies, methodologies, and processes they use are formally supported in the organization, staff members that join a project after initiation are likely to be able to get up to speed relatively quickly.
Established infrastructure (virtual and physical) including up-to-date workstations, secure Internet connections, managed IT resources, and the project-level resources necessary to support development operations such as continuous integration, testing automation, shared repositories, VPN connections, etc. When these resources are already in place, there are practices in place to operate and maintain them, setting up a secure, reliable project structure is relatively easy and the resulting operations are robust, reliable and secure.
Body shops generally offer:
Relatively quick access to individual resources or the ability to pull together small teams from contractors. Most cannot offer a great deal in the way of project planning – their business model is to provide experienced resources, whose resumes, skills, rates, and availability have been checked – not to provide full-service for longer-term engagements.
They may offer some level of infrastructure at the organizational level, mostly virtual, but since their resources are generally remote, this means they will have difficulty providing the same level of security, methodology, and practices that you would find in a full-service vendor with a data center.
Relatively low-cost resources for short term, well-defined engagements. They offer little in the way of project oversight so it is incumbent on their clients to provide the project planning, requirements, and organizational resources the project needs.
Understanding the difference between staff augmentation and true nearshore partnerships.
When Things Go Wrong
As we mentioned earlier, projects go off the tracks when you assume or are told your vendor’s business model is one thing and it turns out it is another. If you go to a full-service provider to fill a spot need (a few weeks to a month with one or two resources) you are likely to be surprised when you read the quote. Their proposal will generally include options or steps you might have assumed you would do in-house or weren’t needed. Their resources will be more expensive when compared on skills and experience and their value will be harder to judge against vendors who do not have the same level of overhead, staff and organizational support.
If you go to a body shop and expect the vendor to be able to provide an experienced team for a longer engagement, you are likely to be surprised that you are expected to take responsibility for bringing together everything needed to ensure the project operates with industry-standard methodologies and the team collaborates in ways that provide strong production metrics, reliable and maintainable code and proactively manages risks while avoiding «feature creep.»
There are a lot more things that could be said about picking a software development outsourcing partner with a business model that is not suited to your needs, but the point is – when you don’t know what you need or what the vendor is really offering – the outcome can be more expensive and less successful than it should be.
If you don’t ask, most vendor sales are likely to be opportunistic. They want more business above all and will present the picture they think you are looking for. Somebody shops will provide resumes on their letterhead to make it appear the resources are in-house. They might even go so far as to recast past experience as «in-house» when in fact the contractor offered was working directly or for another provider. Some full-service vendors will offer junior resources for short assignments or staff from the bench that cannot be committed more than a few hours or days at a time. They aren’t being «dishonest» – they are trying to get full utilization and lower their overhead, but in the end, if you call them back for that resource again, they may be unable to break them loose. The same may be said of the body shop, however, since they generally cannot fill the available hours of their contractors for every day of the year, they will often have to substitute with another resource if you need to bring someone back to continue work.
Establishing the right relationship with your outsourcing vendor is key to ensuring alignment, communication, and project success. A partner, not just a provider.
The Right Vendor for the Need
All this comes down to one thing – regardless of your need, you need to have outsourcing vendors whose business model you understand and that gives you the ability to use the one that fits the need you are resourcing. This means having conversations, relationships, with your vendors and establishing a partner-level dialogue so you have confidence in what they can do for you successfully. It takes time and attention throughout the relationship to maintain the level of communication needed and it should be as much from the vendor as from you. But, if you can establish partnerships with your outsourcing vendors, the outcomes should be better for both sides.
In that «best case» scenario you might use your «body shop» partner to provide:
Spot resources to fill short term needs within your own teams or to bring a specific skill when needed that is otherwise time-consuming to find and contract.
Low-cost resources that you plan to manage in-house and provide whatever they need to be successful in working with you.
Replace positions lost through attrition, illness, vacations, etc. while you search for permanent replacements.
And you could use your full-service development shop partner to provide:
Small to large experienced teams to become an integrated but largely self-sufficient part of your operations that can be responsible for strategic projects without straining your internal staff.
Agile project teams that can use the methodology effectively to develop less defined but critical applications collaboratively with your staff.
Dedicated teams that work as a part of your larger DevOps system for continuous app development either as part of enterprise or product teams for client-facing applications.
Either scenario represents putting your outsourcing partner’s business model to the best use for your needs, not bending either one into a configuration that could be a bad fit for both you and your service partner. If your organization is small or a startup, it may seem like a lot to take on to take the first step, establishing a partner-level relationship but in the long run, even a small operation can benefit from an atmosphere of shared understanding and trust – perhaps even more than enterprise-level organizations who have more leeway for risk.
Choosing the wrong outsourcing partner can cost more than money, it can cost trust, time, and product success.
At Scio, we are not a body shop. We’re a full-service nearshore partner based in Latin America, serving companies across the U.S. from Dallas to Austin and beyond. We offer full visibility, culturally aligned teams, and long-term collaboration built on mutual understanding.
Contact Scio today to explore how a true software development partnership can outperform traditional outsourcing models.
FAQs that clarify the key differences between body shops and full-service nearshore partners in software development.
FAQs: Body Shop vs Full-Service Outsourcing Partner
Q1: What is a body shop in software outsourcing?
A1: A body shop provides individual developers or small contractor teams without offering full project ownership, methodology, or support infrastructure.
Q2: How can I tell if my vendor is a body shop?
A2: If you’re receiving only resumes, managing developers directly, and lack visibility into processes or support systems, you’re likely dealing with a body shop.
Q3: What risks come with working with a body shop?
A3: You assume responsibility for project success, team collaboration, security, and methodology—often leading to delays or quality issues.
Q4: Why choose a full-service nearshore partner instead?
A4: Nearshore partners like Scio provide integrated teams, predictable delivery, cultural alignment, and secure, scalable development environments.
Q5: Can a body shop work for short-term projects?
A5: Yes—body shops can be useful for short-term staff augmentation if you already have strong internal processes and management in place.
One more thing? Clocks on the wall, for each part of the distributed team, with labels. It seems simple – but when you need to reach someone before they leave for the day – it can make all the difference.
