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

391–400 of 632 posts

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

#391

Post by JamesBarney »

sidlls wrote: post #252
nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

I have a different (admittedly controversial) take, having been on the "tech ladder" for some time now (as a Senior SWE and Lead Engineer): most individual contributors overestimate how much value they actually provide, especially in the Bay Area. That isn't to say we're not under-appreciated and under-compensated (we are both). But realistically much of the time work we do is easily done by literally thousands of ot…

Just like how you say the work engineers do is not magic. That literally 1000s of other people can do it.

That's also true of marketing, sales, and product development.

Takes sales for instance, sales is knowing your clients needs, and knowing how your product fits into those needs and then having a shit load of conversations about how your product fits clients needs. There isn't any magic. You can contact more people, and you can convince a few percent more people to buy your product.

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

#392

Post by eropple »

lmm wrote: post #368
unabst wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, there are always exceptions. The point is, what works works, and if you're forced to make things work, before you know it, you'll find yourself looking awfully similar to those in a similar situation. There is a reason why these business structures are so common. They work.

Is it that they're the only way that works? Or is it that everyone just assumes they're the only way? E.g. Valve took a radically different approach to management and organisational structure and seems to have been very successful.

Valve is largely paralyzed and if you aren't in the group of cool kids most of that self-actualizing stuff in the HR document/propaganda material doesn't really apply to you.

Enough people have left because of it that the bloom is well off the rose.

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

#393

Post by MatthewMcDonald »

charlesdm wrote: post #380
hahamrfunnyguy wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a manager I disagree. The right people are difficult to come by. Sure an engineer can be replaced - but in how many weeks or months, and what about the knowledge leaving the company?

Isn't this just also dependent on pay? Let's take a ridiculous example, but if someone were to offer me, say, $1m (a year) to work on a specific key niche project (i.e. something that fits within my skill set and where I could add tremendous value) then I would happily move wherever around the world. Pay more -> you'll probably get a (significantly) higher amount of qualified applicants?

For a while; money isn't everything, and once they have enough of it, people will leave to chase whatever they're really interested in.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/2/13/14599186/google-waymo-sel...

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

#394

Post by MatthewMcDonald »

JamesBarney wrote: post #240
MatthewMcDonald wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Top-flight talent exists but they're all "Unobtanium" for anything that isn't a unicorn, IPO'd, or founded by one of their friends I disagree; top talent is very obtainable, provided that you have: * decent compensation * great culture * interesting problems to solve * a great hiring process We've grown our engineering team from 12 to 29 since opening up shop in Kansas City this February, and I could not be happier…

I don't think the poster would consider Kansas City a "hotspot". I think he's referring to San Francisco/Silicon Valley, and New York.

Yep, you're right; I wouldn't call it a hotspot either. I must have been reading too fast.

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

#395

Post by trjordan »

simonbarker87 wrote: post #2

Can a failed, or mildy successful, founder jump to the exec track and get some level of success faster than if they had just set out on that path to begin with? I’m thinking of those people who have run a business for 3+ years before it tanks or who are looking for a new thing and just decide to leave

I did that, sort of. But I was an exec(ish) before I founded a company.

I think founding a company helped my career, but not necessarily faster than working on a similar exec-level track for 2 years.

Reading this article was interesting to me. I really bristled at the descriptions of founder and employee, but exec feels comfortable. I really enjoy owning a set of responsibilities that's not redundant with anybody else in the organization, and I enjoy working on internal relationships in order to help everybody get their work done better ("politics").

Maybe at some point I'll found another company, because that pressure really does force you to confront the weakest parts of your professional skillset. I learned a ton about myself by doing it.

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

#396

Post by vvanders »

roenxi wrote: post #372
vvanders wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything you listed is just a multiplier on if the technology actually works . If you have a sucky multiplier of course your product won't do well but if it isn't technically executed right you still have a zero.

But that argument goes all the way down the value chain. You'll end up with something like food production > transport > tech. The chain can be as long as you feel too. It is a radical proposition that a farm day laborer adds more value than an elite tech worker because 'the system would stop without food'. The value add is controlled by the person who decides what "value add" is. That is the executive, original prod…

Yes, we call that Society and as you're seeing Puerto Rico none of the tech matters if you don't have basic infrastructure. They definitely add more value than us.

Are they under-represented and under-valued? Probably. Just like IT, they only get noticed when things screw up or go wrong.

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

#397

Post by lostcolony »

sidlls wrote: post #252
nichochar wrote: post #42

This is rather true in practice, but I find it tremendously depressing. I have found that the executive path is actually the one that most of the scumbags take, it is the one that attracts the most people, and those people are usually not likable, they're salespeople that sell themselves all day. The third group, the one that actually creates value, is accurately represented as not as successful both in terms of mone…

I have a different (admittedly controversial) take, having been on the "tech ladder" for some time now (as a Senior SWE and Lead Engineer): most individual contributors overestimate how much value they actually provide, especially in the Bay Area. That isn't to say we're not under-appreciated and under-compensated (we are both). But realistically much of the time work we do is easily done by literally thousands of ot…

You are both correct and incorrect.

As others mentioned, product/sales/marketing/etc can all be replaced just as easily as developers.

However, and I think this -may- be your point, the work generated by those groups is understood by upper management as a key to success, whereas upper management likely does not understand that having the best tech is also a key to success (and, honestly, it's one that can many times be partially overcome by sufficient marketing, or overshadowed by bad product people, or...).

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

#398

Post by eru »

mgkimsal wrote: post #358
s73ver_ wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cons: Insurance and pre-existing conditions. Not to put a damper on your post, as it sounds like you have had good success. But this is a very real thing for many people. When I graduated and went out into the world, I needed insurance, and this was before the ACA, which meant that my pre-existing condition was not something that would be insurable, at least at any decent rate. The ACA fixed that, but now you have th…

Getting political for a moment... it's disturbing that we've had health care fundamentally tied to employment (in the US) for decades now. I don't quite know how you break this down. I wouldn't think it has to be 'single-payer' to get past this but... I don't know. > for many people, currently the climate is not one where they could go without a group plan that they'd get at their employer. It's been this way for dec…

> I wouldn't think it has to be 'single-payer' to get past this but... I don't know.

For a start, eliminate the tax discrimination that makes employer paid health insurance cheaper.

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

#399

Post by graphememes »

unabst wrote: post #343
f2f wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are/were six-wheeled cars that got shut out because of market forces unrelated to how well they ran in competition. Google Tyrrell's Formula 1 Six Wheeler

Yes, there are always exceptions. The point is, what works works, and if you're forced to make things work, before you know it, you'll find yourself looking awfully similar to those in a similar situation. There is a reason why these business structures are so common. They work.

This is totally a sales pitch.

You can tell because when confronted with an alternative that works and is viable you get the age ol' "Yeah well anything is possible"

Of course, what is current was also possible, you're ignoring the fact you're buying into the current dogma and repeating it.

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

#400

Post by eru »

koolba wrote: post #115
krat0sprakhar wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For someone who recently graduated and quite clueless about financial planning, do you have some resources to get started?

The usual generic financial advice I give is: - Maximize every retirement vehicle offered to you (max 401k, HSA, etc). - Pretend that any money you sock away for retirement doesn't exist. This is best done with automated withdrawals so you never even consider it money in your checking account. - Learn to cook. This doesn't actually save much money at the individual level but is huge for families. - Set up separate ac…

Optimize your taxes, and invest in the lowest cost, most diversified funds you can get. (That's mostly index funds.)

Optimizing your taxes can mean investing in your own home. That's the opposite of diversified, but in a lot of countries the tax advantages are just too big to ignore.

Post reply on HN