zlacker

>>sberen+(OP)
This is the second article about hardware supply from China I've read and it reads very much the same, albiet in a different niche (the other one was about SBC construction) -Anything you don't specify will be done least cost, and there is no amount of "least" which cannot be chased in manufacture.

The other one noted if you don't specify the density of plastic for bags, or paper for bags and packing, you get clingfilm thinner than you thought existed, and paper which is almost tissue in its weakness. You don't even get boxes to put the boxes in, if you don't specify boxes to be delivered in boxes. So now wrapping a pallet becomes a nightmare if they don't stack. And if you don't specify how many to stack, and how to pad the stack, they won't do unit height stacking if it costs labour time. Your risk.

Some of this like the casting mistake, or the knob thing, could happen anywhere and you have to be close to final manufacture spec to find out e.g. the metal coating impinges on the knob at the free space you specified, because your test rig didn't have powder coating. Or, that a design feature you need like the light entry holes, is used by the casting engineer as pour points because it looked like you'd specified mould pour points not functional holes.

But other things like "yea, you didn't spec how long to make the tails so we cut the tails as close as we could" is just the cheapening above: if you don't SAY its a 10cm tail for the connector, it will be 2cm, if saving 8cm of cable saves money for them.

I've read some stuff which says the cost of 5 SBC boards with pre-applied SMD is now so low, you might as well order 5 so you get at least 1 which works. That means they will wind up working out your tolerance for failure, and produce goods to meet that: if 1 in 5 is viable, thats what they'll target.

>>ggm+Q48
Working with a Chinese vendors is an adversarial first relationship, where 差不多 is deeeeep in the culture (and, from my experience, tends to survive trips across the ocean).

There are professional communication/training courses for working with Chinese vendors/colleagues that spell all of this out, because it's not some secret. It's just a very different culture, with high context communication (I'll let you read what the practical implications of that are elsewhere). Want to have your mind blown? Look up what it means when they say "yes", when you're explaining something.

Being a low context person, I have significant and severe communication problems when working with Chinese colleagues/vendors.

>>nomel+3o8
>Look up what it means when they say "yes", when you're explaining something.

Is there a term for this? Because I see it in my personal life as well dealing with some low price manual labor that doesn't speak english.

Instructions often get lost in translation, the reply will be "yes" and it doesn't get done. I know they want to sound professional and confident, so saying no or asking questions is a "bad thing".

>>mlrtim+eo9
Lying. It is called lying, deceit, or bearing false witness.

In my house I do not permit "yeah", or "okay". It is "yes" and anything else is interpreted as a 'no'.

Once you press someone to speak a "yes" as a solid commitment, for example to an understanding of an instruction. If this puts the person on the defensive then you are dealing with someone who is not interested in being held accountable.

Let your yes be yes.

>>pizzaf+D8a
This isn't fair, because it's misunderstanding the problem. It's not that they're lying, it's that, in their culture, the meaning of yes is something different, meaning "I hear you" rather than "I understand you". If they're not strong with english they might not have a grasp of this, so (in the case of Mandarin as primary language) you have to usually think of it as an empty "uh huh" type filler word, not a word with actual meaning.

The real problem I have is the "saving face" concept prevents them admitting they don't understand something. This is where the "high context" part comes in. You can't listen to what they say directly, you have to go off how they say it, and other context clues. This is what I have the biggest problem with. The only way to know if they actually understand something is test their understanding, like have them repeat/explain it back to you. From a low context/western perspective, this results in low verbal trust (because it technically is). I've wasted so many hours on taking something said at face value, that I just default to verifying everything that's said, and trying to be patient when I find out the truth. But, I am getting much better at reading the cues, so can usually spot when the (from my western/low context perspective) bullshit when it starts.

There are old stereotypes around this clash of meaning/culture, but it really is just that. If you're from their culture, and speak their language, there's no "bullshitting" or "lying". From what I've been told, it's incredibly clear when someone is saving face, and it's very clear what the response should be, to "help" them save face. Westerners are, literally, just blind to it all. It's an incompatible mindset and language/expression that requires a robust translation layer that needs to exist in one of the parties. I seem to be mostly incapable of high context communication, even in english, so I'm just as "at fault" in the two party role of communication.