At the end there is a summary.

There is a network tire fitting in Chelyabinsk, on each corner there are their small stalls. They came up with a tricky way to increase sales. In the tire season, especially in the fall, they hire a bunch of homeless people and drunks.

It turns out something like this structure in every stall: manager, normal tire fitting, and a bunch of homeless people. The manager is engaged in remuneration and labor organization, talks with clients, resolves disputes. A tire technician does all the hard work - balancing, re-bumping, controlling the tightening torque, etc.

And the homeless people stupidly take off and put the wheels. And, like, they still know how to put them into the sink.

The scheme is simple. A man arrives to change his shoes, without an appointment. He sees that there are already a lot of cars, and everything seems to be working. I’m upset - I’ll have to turn around and leave, look further... But it wasn’t there - the manager runs up, says - we’re glad to see you, then this, we’ll try again. Gene, Kolya, drag the jack, serve the customer!

The homeless run up and take off one or two wheels. That's all, the client is in the house.

He will wait an hour and two. Nobody deals with his removed wheels, they just lie in line, among the wheels of the same lucky ones. A man stands and freezes - it’s scary to get into a car with the wheels removed, but not pushing into a stall, there is not enough space.

The whole thing is that he took off the wheels, and he will not leave. It can, of course, rebel, and they will probably put the wheels in their place - they will only make him pay for the removal/installation. But no one seems to be buzzing especially - because autumn, it is already snowing on the street, and a person understands (or thinks that he understands): wherever he goes, the same garbage is everywhere.

I have been using tire fitting services for a long time, but I have not seen such an approach anywhere else. Usually they just say - everything is scheduled until the evening. Or put in a live queue, but the wheels are not removed.

The difference in approaches and captivating. You’ll travel around the city for a couple of hours, everywhere - from the gate turn, and then - they’ll immediately “engage in” you. Suppose that in the end you wait even longer, but it’s nice to deal with “customer-oriented” guys, it’s nice to deal.

Before, I didn’t notice how widespread this approach is in IT.

The essence of the approach


The bottom line is simple: to make everything so that it is cheaper for the customer to continue working with you than to skip to other employees or contractors. Even if you have heaped utter nonsense. Actually, it’s even better if you did a lot of nonsense.

Rollback, transition should be difficult, or even impossible.

I will give some examples.

Factory programmers


These guys, as far as I managed to study them, "take off the wheels" unconsciously. In general, if anything, I myself have been a factory programmer for almost 10 years - in case it seems that I do not know what I'm talking about.

Self-taught - usually those who studied programming right at the factory and didn’t see anything except the native walls of the closet-near-the-server, suffer from “wheel loosening”. These guys do not learn any practices, do not read articles and free courses on programming, architecture, etc.

They live like gnomes in the forest. Nobody has ever seen their code, criticized it, or tested it for banal adequacy to anything other than “works” and “user is satisfied.”
All this is revealed when the programmer leaves the factory. In this situation, it turns out that the homeless people removed the wheels of the client, and then escaped, or he drove them out himself - not noticing that something was wrong with his car. In fairness, I note that there is usually a customer’s fault here - he himself happily “sits down” on the programmer.

And then another programmer comes in, especially with an hourly rate. He sees this game and rubs his hands. Because everything is done in such a way that for elementary changes you have to pay 2, 4, or even 10 times more expensive. So the wheels are removed.

For example, instead of 50 query lines, 3000 lines of code were written - just recently I saw such an example. And there are about three dozen such crafts. No one knows how they work. No one remembers what data they should take, how to filter, connect, etc. Even what’s wrong, no one can explain.

Having come to grips with freelancers, always nagging new employees, wild bills for payment from aggregators, customers, spitting and swearing, call their gnome to come and continue the endless tire fitting.

CIS Implementation Projects


All implementers have long filled up cones with implementation projects, so they use the "tire" scheme on almost all projects. The main feature is a phased payment. The client, of course, at first tries to screw in his favorite requirement “introduce me on a turn-key basis”, but they quickly explain to him, including using fashionable agile terminology that even dinosaurs don’t do that.

Then everything is simple - you have to “give up” more often, thereby removing the wheel after the wheel. The key point is the launch of the system, which is preferably carried out on a couple of working circuits, without waiting for the completion of all work - again, an agile chip (more often show the result). Here, by the way, tire workers would learn how to periodically relieve tension from the client. For example, twist the third wheel, defiantly drag it into the stall.

The main thing in such a project is to hold out longer. The longer, the more you have time to sign acts and receive money - in the event of a client’s failure, you will lose at most 1-2 months of revenue. The more you act ("take off the wheels"), the more difficult it is for the client to turn around and leave.

Conscientious services


There is a psychological connection, if the client did not order the project, but a one-time job. For example, a person calls and says that he needs a revision of the system. Tells what it is like, and asks for a preliminary estimate. Hints or directly says that he has contacted several organizations.

Stupid people usually fall off right away, offering to analyze and evaluate for money. Lazy fall away a little later, because they will not give any answer to the client at all, or the terms will be extended to insane. Most simply give an assessment from the ceiling or “from experience” and wait for good luck.

A separate category of people who visited the tire service, immediately begins to do something. The ideal option is if the customer agrees to a remote connection, shows and tells what he needs to do, and at the same time, so as not to get up twice, he will show, at the request of the caller, other problems in accounting and automation.

But even without a remote connection, you can “remove the wheels”, based on the experience of solving similar problems. Suffice it to say that you have already begun to solve the problem. It’s cool, if it is connected with some kind of integration, then the phrase “we have already contacted the developers of the second system, we will discuss the formats and solutions” will help. ”
A face-to-face meeting magically acts, if possible. Now most of the tasks are solved remotely, and personal contact, chemistry relationships simply does not arise. However, if you come - especially if it will not be a manager, but a specialist who “will look right away” - the probability of getting a task increases greatly.

Although, all this is done not to get a task, but to get a client. All his tasks. Generally, a normal move. Previously, everyone did this when there was no udalenka, so nothing special was seen in personal meetings. Now, with the help of personal contact, you can “remove the wheels.”

The key action here is to make the client feel a little uncomfortable to refuse. People are sitting there too, and if they set the task and make the same decision, then creating small “pangs of conscience” for them is quite a method for themselves. The rest, after all, limited themselves to evaluation, did not “work out with us.”

Add to the "unique technology"


It is becoming less common - customers have long understood that the more unique the technology, the more difficult it is to find specialists to escort - those who will complete the “removed wheels”. But Russia is great and immense, and people who do not want to delve into not even the subtleties, but even the “thickness” of IT are a dime a dozen.

The sellers of “unique technology” play on the “uniqueness” of the client - it must be understood, seen, fished and demonstrated. For example, a Bitrix website is not suitable for you - it is a template technology for scarab with visits to 500 people a day. You have the highest load, and you need a unique system built on a unique technology that is not even on the market. Or - the typical 1C configuration is not suitable for you, even with adaptation, you have unique, ultra-efficient business processes that developers have not even heard about - they work for the "average company". Therefore, you need system development from scratch. Well, etc.

It happens that the client himself is looking for just such a “unique” technology.He calls, talks about how he has everything there in a special way, and even sellers of unique systems who are healthy on the head answer - damn it, dude, you have everything, like everyone else, don’t pick our brains, buy yourself 1C: Bookkeeping, a website on Bitrix and box integration between them. But the client persists, develops, supports and by all means defends the opinion of his own uniqueness. Getting, in the end, written from scratch 1C: Bookkeeping, reissued by CMS a la Bitrix, and man-made, badly working integration between them.

Further it is clear. The wheels are removed not only for the duration of the project - forever. The client buries his head in the sand and does not see himself inventing a bicycle. And the contractor, by all means, regularly convinces the customer’s decision-maker that all the rest, miserable day laborers, were not nearby. It’s worth it, for years, with the wheels removed.

Good or evil?


I don’t know, to be honest. I do not want to give an assessment - in any case, the strategy of “removing the wheels” will have both supporters and opponents. The subject is rather slippery.

The goal, from the point of view of the business, is quite normal for itself - to receive the client’s money, and to receive them in the future. The question is, rather, in the methods.

Competition is generally thought to be better. Faster, better, cheaper - it is better, in general, to meet the needs of the client, or rather to get into them. To differ from competitors for the better in order to win when choosing.

"Removing the wheels", however, resembles, rather, not the desire to win when choosing, but the desire to deprive the client of choice. In terms of meaning, it resembles the creation of a monopoly, at least temporarily, on a limited scale.

However, sometimes “wheel removal” is exactly what the client needs, he wants and asks for it. For example, in conditions of a shortage of specialists or companies of the required profile. Well, if he asks, why refuse.

Summary


One well-known tire fitting uses a tricky technique: remove a couple of wheels from a car when a person arrives to “change shoes” so that he does not change his mind and does not leave.

Some programmers and companies do the same.

Factory programmers automate the enterprise in such a way that it would be long and expensive to maintain and modify it without them.

On automation projects, the integrator tries to dig deeper into the client with small steps in order to extract a constant flow of money, while preventing the client from jumping.

When providing small automation services, programmers can start work before agreeing on a cost, so that it is more difficult for a client to refuse to continue. Or they are imposed on a personal meeting so that the client thinks: “they are engaged in us.”

Replacing “unique technology” - “wheel removal” in its pure form.

"Removing the wheels" is like creating a monopoly. That deprives the customer of the choice, or substantially complicates it.

Source