This blog post makes the classic sales mistake of trying to market the product you want to sell instead of the product the customer would want to buy.
In this case the author has assumed that the customer doesn't know what React is, what it's used for, what it does, who uses it, or even what a React developer does. If the customer knew those things they wouldn't need the first half of the article that explains what they are. But the second half of the article still tries to sell the React development service.
Customers that know what React is and know they want a React dev don't need all the explainer at the start.
Customers that don't know what React is or what a React dev does probably want a web dev and don't really care what framework they're going to use. They just want a web app dev.
Consequently the article won't really work to sell services to anyone. It's poorly written for a knowledgable audience because it treats people like newbies, or it's too detailed for an actual newbie.
Worse the article makes the developer mistake of briefly arguing for React comparative to Vue and Angular as opposed to why bother with the giant monolithic framework in the first place. This is problematic in that it assumes a level of knowledge upon the reader that is contrary to the point of the article in the first place.
This is a common uninformed hiring mistake that implicitly assumes there must be a giant monolithic framework. It suggests you don’t really know what you want but that you think you need it because it’s popular. There is a silent immaturity in this kind of reasoning.
Does that ease hiring? I suspect it does. Any time you can slap an agreed upon term to an abstract concept the concept becomes something that can be communicated past. Just because candidate availability increases does not suggest candidate performance or fitness for work is any different. That is the elephant in the room for these kinds of subjects as the result is over paying for unqualified talent.
2 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 12.8 ms ] threadIn this case the author has assumed that the customer doesn't know what React is, what it's used for, what it does, who uses it, or even what a React developer does. If the customer knew those things they wouldn't need the first half of the article that explains what they are. But the second half of the article still tries to sell the React development service.
Customers that know what React is and know they want a React dev don't need all the explainer at the start.
Customers that don't know what React is or what a React dev does probably want a web dev and don't really care what framework they're going to use. They just want a web app dev.
Consequently the article won't really work to sell services to anyone. It's poorly written for a knowledgable audience because it treats people like newbies, or it's too detailed for an actual newbie.
This is a common uninformed hiring mistake that implicitly assumes there must be a giant monolithic framework. It suggests you don’t really know what you want but that you think you need it because it’s popular. There is a silent immaturity in this kind of reasoning.
Does that ease hiring? I suspect it does. Any time you can slap an agreed upon term to an abstract concept the concept becomes something that can be communicated past. Just because candidate availability increases does not suggest candidate performance or fitness for work is any different. That is the elephant in the room for these kinds of subjects as the result is over paying for unqualified talent.