I have seen companies which dont know latest & fullproof technologies like Microservices, Devops, Azure service fabric, .Net core, MEAN stack, etc.but still they charge 50$/hr and there are clients hiring them.
In the other case, we are providing all the above mentioned latest technologies, still people go with old names and dont trust performing companies.
We are top rated Upwork professionals
Still No luck.
Shouldnt they be changing their mindset and shake hands with latest cutting edge technocrats ?
The tone of your message says it all. Arrogance is a niche play. There are those for whom that resonates and you'll do well in that space. In the general marketplace, however, a bit more introspection and understanding of customer pain points beyond the tech are more important. Making a customer feel stupid and calling your competition 'shit' is not the most effective way to woo those clients. Eventually the market will determine who does not deliver, who deliver's crap and those firms will either evolve or expire. The same can be said for those firms who don't treat customers intelligently.
This thread will probably be removed if you don't get rid of the upwork link.
To answer your question, companies that have been around a long time (and thus have a reputation/history) develop libraries and techniques around older pieces of technology. Using this older stack does not necessarily mark them as bad companies, while jumping to whatever the new hot technology is at any given moment might actually have a negative impact on their clients.
When I build things for clients, I use the tech that's best for their problem and the one that they'll most easily find other developers to maintain later in their lifecycle when they grow and build in-house teams. This need not be (and usually isn't) the newest or flashiest technology.
Also, since this is a sales-related question at its core, examine all aspects of your sales pitch.
Because not everything is about the "latest technologies". There is a lot more money to be made by working on legacy stacks than there is working on the latest flavor of the month framework.
What makes you think they are "shit companies"? Because they don't hire you? Not everyone wants to work the way you think they should work.
We have been outsourcing since 1999 and have been blessed with some excellent talent And have had to endure a litany of shysters and "artful dodgers".
The acrid and unprofessional tone of your post would make me say "Next"!
here are my observations;
Hope you win more business!
First, some background. I manage the datacenter team for a company you've definitely heard of, but not an F1000. I'm also heavily involved with the development organization.
Most of the things other people have said are probably true, but I don't actually know you. So you may, in fact, be awesome at what you do. The skill you may need to learn, then, is to tone down the type of full-of-yourself waves that people are assuming you have based on this post. It could also be, however, that English isn't your first language, in which case everything most of the people is shaded by that understanding.
First, to the kind of companies you're talking about, $50/h is paltry. Finding a team that can deliver sprints on the tech stack that you need is an exercise in slamming your head against walls for months or years, however. So when you go to Upwork (or India) you're looking for the feeling that company you're going to hire can reliably deliver in the things you need today.
Now, what do you need today?
I have world-class experts on my team, and in the company in general. Rails, Node.js, UI/UX, Devops, microservices, and unfortunately even some Java. All of that? No problem. But what if for some silly reason we suddenly needed to support an ASP app? That we'd have to farm out. Nobody uses it, nobody wants to use it.
Do we want bells and whistles? No! Absolutely not! We want as close to a stock, reference architecture as possible. And that's because, by farming it out, we know it's going to be low quality as compared to what we can create ourselves. So the last thing we want is low-quality code that's exponentially more complicated than it needs to be.
The problem with what you're calling "technocrats" is that they'll abandon you on a moment's notice for something that looks shiny. Every 6 months or year, you'll get a new team with hot new ideas...that require a complete refactor of the code. Why, though? Practically infinite reasons -
So it's not about changing their minds, it's about delivering things on time. In most companies, time is much more critical than budget. If you go 10-20% over budget but hit your release date that is a highly successful launch. If you go 10% under budget but slip? You screwed up.
So it's not about money, or even the technology stack. We do startup-like things with our inhouse teams. We're reasonably cutting edge...but I'm never going to farm that out. The cost to fail for an in-house team is much cheaper than the cost for an outsourced team to fail. In-house, if a dev team tries to deploy an HA application with all of the new hotness (unknown database, weird-ass language, whatever is replacing Bootstrap in 3 years, etc) that's fine. We've paid them to fail, but they learned a ton that will be useful on the next project. If we do the exact same thing with an outsourced team, we've paid them to fail so that their next client will benefit.
Shalin; it's hard to find a place to start here. I'll start by saying that i am currently working with a dev team in India. It is painful. SO PAINFUL. I can't count the times i've wanted to reach through the Skype connection and hurt somebody. Those offshore dev teams that understand the source of potential frustrations and eliminate/mitigate them will win. So, despite your less than professional question, here's a good place to start: 1) Know your customer/prospects: your personal tag line states "top rated offshore enterprise software company". Enterprise scale companies very rarely offshore to no-name, small india dev shops on Upwork. That's a challenge. You can't expect to sell to customers who's business issues you don't know and understand well. 2) Be humble: "shouldn't they be changing their mindset...". You can wait for them to change their mindset OR you can change yours. 3) What are your competitive differentiators? competitive advantages? What i see in your question is "latest and greatest bleeding-edge tech which enterprise customers don't need/want to offshore and i expect them to send that work to us..." . Not going to happen. How many competitors do you have - how many offshore dev companies are there in India? china? east Europe? How many of those companies say "we know this tech, we have 500 bodies in the back room and our costs are low? 4) if you are the person in charge of marketing and/or sales for your firm i would suggest seeking some help from some people who have expertise in that area. Learn how sales works, especially to "enterprise" customers. As one example: everything you say and post online has an impact. even posting a question here reflects on you and your company. aside from your decision to describe your competitors as "shit" and to blame your prospects for 'not changing their mindset" there are some errors in your written communication (english) which is all too common when dealing with offshore companies. SW dev is about precision and attention to detail. Errors in written communication reflect a lack of attention to detail (right or wrong). It may seem minor, but it would be a welcome differentiator to see an offshore dev shop with high quality if not near flawless written communication skills - how refreshing. I can't tell you the last time i saw an offshore dev website that didn't reflect poor quality in their written communications. 5) I can't over emphasize number 1 above. I'll give you a hint about offshoring dev work from the US to India. Two of the biggest issues are trust and risk. These span a broad spectrum of subjects, but keep these in mind as you re-think your approach to sales/marketing. IN EVERYTHING YOU DO ASK "HOW CAN WE MAXIMIZE TRUST AND MINIMIZE RISK". As just one example, you seem to wonder why customers will pay $50/hr to "old name" companies but not trust you at some lower cost. It comes down to trust and risk. Paying a low cost to some no-name company on Upwork does nothing to address trust and very little to address risk. Trust is all about doing what you say you will do. If you screw up, fix it, make it right. As a customer, knowing that you will do what you say you will do reduces my risk. So as you can see, trust is HUGE. 6) focus on you, not your competitors. calling your larger, more established competitors "shit" tells me you are more interested in what you think your competitors can't do than you are in what you can do. 7) understand your customer/prospects: You state that you have 8 years of experience in a manner that implies that you see this as a badge of honor. Compared to many of your competitors that may be a positive, but from a customer's perspective that tenure barely gets you over the threshold. Again, understand your customer/prospect. Let me say that again UNDERSTAND YOUR CUSTOMER/PROSPECT. First off i would team up with someone/some company that knows the market you are trying to penetrate and act like a sponge - soak up everything you can about how business gets done in that market and why. If you want to understand why you are not winning more deals ask. Every time you lose a deal ask why. Every time you win a deal ask why. good luck.
The fact that they don't use the latest tech does not automatically mean they are shit. You may find these companies have an established track record, and good market reputation = credibility. This means old customers are happy to go back and new ones are easily convinced, and they have multiple references. Also it means their business management should be healthy plus their pricing vs quality acceptable.
Rather try work out what they can offer that you don't, or try to find another competitive advantage that they don't have. And work on your company's reputation in the market. Consider taking subcontracts from the older established firms to build your company's up and get references
Judging from your February 25th post it sounds like you may be the one whose feelings were hurt. You've received quite a bit of really good advice here that you don't seem able to accept because you don't like the fact that it also addressed your tone. You might want to take a deep breath and read these posts again because the answers you seek are right in front of you.
I so agree with Candis Best advice "...take a deep breath and read these posts again...".
You have been given a copious amount of excellent recommendations, probably far better than what you might have been given by an expensive "business consultant". It is up to you to apply it.