Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 632 posts

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#21

Post by NikolaeVarius »

autotune wrote: post #20
brndnmtthws wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It really depends on the kind of lifestyle you choose. If you want to live alone in a fancy apartment, drive a new car, and eat out every day, then you certainly won't be able to save as much. If you practice frugality, find cheap housing (which does exist if you look hard enough), and don't spend money on things you don't need, then it's quite easy to save a lot of money.

> fancy apartment Being a 400 sq. ft. studio that you pay $3k per month for to live in an area where you won't get stabbed when you go out at night and is close enough to work where you don't need a car.

Why would you ever live in a studio if you want to save money?

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#22

Post by alexandercrohde »

> • Often don’t get a voice in major decisions – even when you “know the right answer”

I'm not sure if the use of quotes here is intended to imply one doesn't actually know the right answer, but only feels that way. It's a particularly important point, I feel in my career I've met so many managers insecure in themselves that they would never consider listening to an idea from a report, not unless you can convince them it was their own idea.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#23

Post by trevyn »

borski wrote: post #6
trevyn wrote: post #3

There are paths to founder that do not require it to be "incredibly stressful". Another pro for founder is that you can remove yourself from echo chambers if you choose. Maybe this falls under "Choose the people you work with".

Please elaborate. If you are trying to forge your own path, it will definitionally be more stressful than being an employee. As a founder, you are responsible for all of the jobs you've created, and for those employees' livelihoods. Furthermore, there is quite literally nobody else to blame but yourself, unlike in the case of an employee or executive. That is stressful.

Option one, remove sources of stress, typically debt and/or investors; grow slowly and organically -- don't have employees until you can afford them.

Option two, reframe ordinarily stressful things to be less stressful. Stoic philosophy is probably a good start here. Adopt a mindset that does not require you to "be responsible for" your employees. (One possibility: there are plenty of independently wealthy people that will join the right project.) Reject self-flagellation -- the only person "blaming yourself" is you.

I'm sure there are other options as well.

Also consider that while being an employee may provide a sense of financial stability, it introduces other forms of stress, such as reduced autonomy.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#24

Post by cachemiss »

ryandrake wrote: post #7

> Often times there are hard barriers preventing people from starting a company. In these cases my best advice is to move to a tech hub (preferably the Bay Area) and work for a tech company until you can save the money I had to laugh there. Moving to the Bay Area will reduce your ability to save money, not increase it. I was probably saving 40-50% of my salary when I worked in Nowhereville, Florida. With the housing…

If you are bootstrapping, and you are starting a company in an area that does not need the top tier of engineers (which is most of them, regardless of how they talk about hiring the best), I'd consider starting someplace low cost.

I think college towns in the midwest / rust belt are untapped resources, or areas that used to have strong technically focused companies that moved away. I've personally seen founders bootstrap and launch successful companies (B2B with real revenue, not Uber for cats) in areas with little tech presence.

The ability to not have to shell out huge salaries and equity was a real winner, there's also less distractions. You can get strong engineers (no, not SV / Seattle top end engineers, but people that can throw together a reasonable website) for < 100k in these areas, and they won't bounce around as much. You aren't competing with AmaFaceGoogSoft here, you're competing with HR companies and random consulting houses. There's disadvantages to being outside of the tech bubble, but advantages too. That being said, for an employee, you should at least try and do some time in SV / Seattle etc.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#25

Post by j45 »

orthoganol wrote: post #8

What about the world of contracting? You can also be someone who has flexibility on where/ when they work and for who, and it's probably a more viable 'path' in tech than in any other industry. Since the vast majority of founders fail, having significant financial cushions from your family or years working prior is probably the top pre-requisite if 'founder' is your path.

Collapses affect employees too.

Contractors can save many more multiples of cash than employees in the same period of time between collapses, assuming they have some discipline.

Discipline contributes to freedom more than anything.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#26

Post by ghostbrainalpha »

nugget wrote: post #17
trevyn wrote: post #3

There are paths to founder that do not require it to be "incredibly stressful". Another pro for founder is that you can remove yourself from echo chambers if you choose. Maybe this falls under "Choose the people you work with".

My experience is that to be a successful founder you have to be "on call" pretty much 24/7 as you never know when either a major opportunity or a major crisis will arise. People handle situations and stress differently, so this may be more of a burden for some than others.

This was my experience. I had a relatively successful period as Startup founder, and was able to put away some retirement money.

Then instead of doing another startup, I took a less stressful job for less money, and enjoyed my family time.

As a founder I never really had a day off for 5 years. Even if I was "taking a vacation", my laptop was never always in a backpack within 20 feet from me for emergencies, and my mind was always focused on the consequences of failure. For me it was living in fear, even during success.

Some people are more optimistic. They don't feel stress in the same way. I think that is a KEY ingredient in being a successful founder long term.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#27

Post by autotune »

NikolaeVarius wrote: post #21
autotune wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fancy apartment Being a 400 sq. ft. studio that you pay $3k per month for to live in an area where you won't get stabbed when you go out at night and is close enough to work where you don't need a car.

Why would you ever live in a studio if you want to save money?

Why would you ever live with roommates if you want to be sane and productive at work each day?

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#29

Post by ThrustVectoring »

brndnmtthws wrote: post #14
ryandrake wrote: post #7

> Often times there are hard barriers preventing people from starting a company. In these cases my best advice is to move to a tech hub (preferably the Bay Area) and work for a tech company until you can save the money I had to laugh there. Moving to the Bay Area will reduce your ability to save money, not increase it. I was probably saving 40-50% of my salary when I worked in Nowhereville, Florida. With the housing…

It really depends on the kind of lifestyle you choose. If you want to live alone in a fancy apartment, drive a new car, and eat out every day, then you certainly won't be able to save as much. If you practice frugality, find cheap housing (which does exist if you look hard enough), and don't spend money on things you don't need, then it's quite easy to save a lot of money.

Speaking of cheap housing, I've been so pissed off at the blatant rent-seeking that I've been tempted to kit out a cargo van for sleeping in instead of paying outrageous amounts for barely more space.

Re: Three Paths in the Tech Industry: Founder, Executive, or Employee

#30

Post by Dave_Rosenthal »

borski wrote: post #6
trevyn wrote: post #3

There are paths to founder that do not require it to be "incredibly stressful". Another pro for founder is that you can remove yourself from echo chambers if you choose. Maybe this falls under "Choose the people you work with".

Please elaborate. If you are trying to forge your own path, it will definitionally be more stressful than being an employee. As a founder, you are responsible for all of the jobs you've created, and for those employees' livelihoods. Furthermore, there is quite literally nobody else to blame but yourself, unlike in the case of an employee or executive. That is stressful.

> it will definitionally be more stressful than being an employee

I've done all three paths and it's not this cut-and-dry. There are years at startups that aren't stressful at all and years that are stressful. Likewise for being an employee (or executive).

Startups are, by-and-large, less secure than most jobs so if that insecurity bothers you that can create stress. On the other hand, most people starting tech startups are fairly employable and "failing" doesn't really look too bad. On the plus side, at a startup you have more ability to manage your stress by controlling your world.

Post reply on HN