Your best people are full. The roadmap waits on them.
Perform puts senior ERP, EDI and integration engineers on your team, working your hours, so migrations and integrations stop waiting. Each one is screened by a Perform engineer, joins your standups and your repo, and most stay for years.
Three reasons the work cannot wait for a hiring cycle.
months until SAP ECC mainstream maintenance ends. Migration work that starts after a full hiring cycle starts late.
SAP ECC 6.0 mainstream maintenance ends December 31, 2027. Extended maintenance to 2030 is available at extra cost. Source: SAP lifecycle dates.Mainstream support for SAP ECC ends at the end of 2027. The migration needs engineers before the date, while your team keeps the current system running.
An acquired company brings its own ERP, CRM and accounting systems. Joining them takes extra engineers for a few months. We supply them, and they leave the integration documented for your team.
In Fortra’s 2026 survey of 315 IBM i users, 69% named finding people with the right skills as a top concern. The skills get rarer every year the system runs. We bring senior engineers who already know it.
Keep the ERP you run. Our engineers build the data and integration layer on top of it, so your AI plans have something to work with. Get a shortlist for the role you cannot fill.
Every month the role stays open, the roadmap moves.
The role has been open for months. The work went to the people who were already at capacity, and the date you committed to has moved twice.
The ManpowerGroup 2026 Global Talent Shortage Survey covers 39,063 employers in 41 countries. AI model and application development ranks first among hard-to-find skills globally. Separately, 69% of US employers report difficulty filling roles.
Senior engineers, reviewing and handing off the same day, change that this quarter.
Cutting engineers to pay for AI?Most leaders who tried it call it the wrong decision.
The pitch to the CFO goes like this: fewer engineers, less QA, and AI fills the gap, so the savings show up next quarter. Here is what the research says, from the leaders who made the cuts and the engineers who use the tools every day.
of leaders who cut staff because of AI say those cuts were the wrong decision.
Orgvue survey of 1,163 senior leaders, April 2025of US employers report difficulty finding skilled talent. Cut an engineer now and you rehire into that market.
ManpowerGroup 2026 US Talent Shortage Survey, 6,000+ employersof the engineering workforce will need new skills through 2027 as AI creates new roles, Gartner expects.
Gartner, October 2024of AI code generation tests introduced a risky security flaw, across more than 100 models. Someone senior has to review and test it.
Veracode GenAI Code Security Report, October 2025of developers do not trust the accuracy of what their AI tools produce.
Stack Overflow 2025 Developer Survey, 49,000+ responsesis what poor software quality cost the US economy in 2022, including $1.52 trillion in technical debt.
CISQ, The Cost of Poor Software Quality in the US, 2022Gartner’s view: AI will change the engineer’s job, and “human expertise and creativity will always be essential” to complex software. Gartner, October 2024
Our engineers use AI on the work, and answer for every change
AI has no idea why the EDI map carries that exception or what breaks at month-end close. The people who know are the first ones a cut removes. Our engineers learn your systems and stay for years.
Our engineers use AI every day. They read it, test it and answer for it, inside your review process and your definition of done.
A cut shows up as savings this quarter. The rehire shows up later as a search, a ramp and everything the last team knew. Senior engineers who stay keep that knowledge on your systems.
Names and start dates for the role, each engineer screened by a Perform engineer.
Sources open in a new tab.
Every engineer we place is interviewed by one of our engineers.
Our recruiters are engineers. They run the technical screen themselves, so the shortlist you see has already been through someone who could do the job.
Run in full, before the engineer starts.
Every role on the resume confirmed with the employer.
The technical screen is run by someone who could pass it.
Completed before the engagement starts.
You interview every engineer before anything starts.
Every engineer is screened by an engineer who has done the job. They join your standup and your repo, and running the rollout is part of the brief, so what gets built gets used. Tenures here run years, so whoever learns your systems is still on them next year.
For teams that have the direction and the process and need engineers on the work now.
You get the names, the start dates, and the person accountable for them. Contract, contract-to-hire, permanent placement, or a scoped project.
Engineers, measured.
Tests were being requested so late in the lifecycle that nothing they found could be acted on. Leadership wanted the capability on their own team. We built it there.
A reservation platform that buckled above 100 concurrent users now processes 3,500 reservations in 10 minutes, with the waiting room switched off.
Where we win, and where we lose.
| Perform | Hiring in-house | A talent marketplace | A global integrator | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to a working engineer | Weeks | Months, and the senior req may not close | Days | Months, after a bench allocation |
| Who runs the technical screen | An engineer who has done the job, and you can talk to them | You | The platform, or nobody | Their bench process, which you do not see |
| Working hours | Your hours, priced in | Your hours | Whatever the individual keeps | Follow the sun, with handoffs between regions |
| Rate per hour | Middle of the market, said on the first call We lose here | No hourly rate, a salary and the overhead behind it | Lowest of the four | Highest of the four |
| Cost over three years | Higher than a permanent hire who stays We lose here | Lowest, if they stay | Low, if you keep replacing people yourself | Highest |
| Who owns the ramp if the person leaves | We do. The same engineers stay on your systems | You own it, and you own the rehire | You own it every time | They reassign, and you re-explain |
| Embedding in your standards | In your review process and definition of done | Fully | Rarely, the work arrives as deliverables | Contract-defined, which is narrower than your standards |
| Scale you can reach | Teams. Tens of engineers, never hundreds We lose here | Whatever you can hire | Wide, with variable quality | Hundreds of people on one program |
| What is left when it ends | The capability, where the engagement transferred one | Everything | Nothing | Whatever the contract specified |
Comparison written by Perform. Judge the screening claim on the person we put in the room.
What teams ask first.
How is this different from any other staffing firm?
Judge us on who shows up. You interview every engineer yourself, Perform manages them on our side, and nobody sends resumes over the wall. Our recruiters are engineers, which is why the shortlist is short.
We have been burned by offshore before.
Most teams who say that have good reason, and it usually came down to one of two things: the timezone gap, or a team that agreed to everything and raised problems late. Tell us which one it was and we will say plainly whether our setup differs for that specific failure. Our engineers work your hours and hand off the same day.
How does the price compare to hiring in-house?
Perform sits in the middle of the market, priced for engineers who are technically strong. Two things change the math. Nearshore rates sit well under a US hire fully loaded, and when the engagement ends the meter stops with no severance.
We would rather hire full time.
Then hire the person. The question is what the roadmap costs while you search. Senior roles sit open for months and the work does not pause. We keep it moving during the hunt and hand over when your person starts.
We already have a staffing partner.
Then you know how it works. Most teams keep two, because one partner never covers every skill and the second one keeps the first accountable. The useful question is which role your current partner keeps missing.
Tell us the role and the date. We bring names, each one screened by an engineer who has done the job. The engineers work from LATAM, India and the Philippines, on your hours. Most stay for years, so the person who learns your systems is still on them next year. Six months in, they raise the next problem before anyone asks.
- Names and start dates
- Every engineer screened by an engineer who has done the job, after background checks, employment verification and references
- Tenures run years, so whoever learns your systems stays on them
Not for anyone shopping for the lowest rate on an open req. We sit in the middle of the market, and we say so early.