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

CTO day 2: downsizing the team

danlebrero.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 112 posts

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#21

Post by jacquesm »

crispyambulance wrote: post #19

There's a common consequence to staff cuts that OP did not seem to consider: when cuts occur, OTHERS take that as a signal to leave. He just blindsided his staff on "day 2", it could easily happen that another 2,3,4, or more people are now planning to GTFO before they're next. All that careful planning will then be for shit because he just cut to the bone, and then the bones will start leaving. There's no easy way to…

Exactly. Everybody that is able to move is going to move and this organization will collapse in a couple of months when the last people that have knowledge will leave. The only people that won't leave are the ones that can't leave and usually those are not the ones that keep the lights on.

Dumbest move ever. If on day #2 you think you know enough about an organization to start hacking away dead wood then you are way out of your league.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#22

Post by jacquesm »

emerongi wrote: post #16
dvt wrote: post #9

> As heartless as this may seem... It's not heartless, it's just stupid. It's like screwing in a lightbulb with a hammer. > And I didn’t want to do the task so, consciously ignoring Mr. Weinberg, I transformed the ordeal into an optimization problem, for which I wrote an application to help me with. Treating people like robots is probably the worst way to solve people ops problems. It's like managers learned nothing…

He needed to evaluate the team based on some criteria one way or another. He chose certain criteria and used the computer to assist him in the evaluation. Another option would be to choose the team on who you just "like the most". Maybe this would have been more to your liking? It's more human, I guess. However, notice that there is still a criteria and still an evaluation phase, you can't avoid it (unless you pick b…

He should have realized that he lacked the knowledge and experience to tell his boss to fuck off because on day #2 on the job you simply can not make this decision in a way that won't kill the company.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#23

Post by jacquesm »

big5 wrote: post #17
dvt wrote: post #9

> As heartless as this may seem... It's not heartless, it's just stupid. It's like screwing in a lightbulb with a hammer. > And I didn’t want to do the task so, consciously ignoring Mr. Weinberg, I transformed the ordeal into an optimization problem, for which I wrote an application to help me with. Treating people like robots is probably the worst way to solve people ops problems. It's like managers learned nothing…

KISS. Let the coin to make decision, flip it. You are all welcome.

That would have been just as good or better.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#24

Post by jacquesm »

Aeolun wrote: post #4
Aqua wrote: post #3

This sounds substantially overengineered way to justify his actions and relieve his conscience. In an organization of 17 people a person in his position would know exactly which people would work together to build a great team and which would not. In such a small team it's as much about the roles as it is about the people themselves, his method apparently completely dismisses that element of the decision.

Maybe not if you are on day 2 of your position as CTO?

Precisely. On day 2 you are still taking stock and figuring out the lay of the land, and you're in absolutely no position to start making decisions with far reaching consequences. The first thing you will want to figure out is what happened with the previous CTO and why that person left.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#25

Post by emerongi »

Sholmesy wrote: post #15
varajelle wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he treats people like robots. The way he "delivers the message" is humane. And the way he selects who must go is totally an optimization problem.

You cannot boil down humans to 5-6 attribute points. What about personalities/coordination/how people actually interact. Product A might be filled with people who are use to taking charge, and Product B might be filled with people who are more reserved about their opinions. This is a dreadful way to solve this problem. If it were that easy, his job as CTO wouldn't exist and we could simply plug it into a SaaS AI that…

And yet we hire based on people's achievements and previous success. And the world keeps on turning.

It's very hard to build the perfect team from the get-go. However, you can probably build a pretty good team over time. In my opinion, it's better to make an average decision than no decision at all; you can improve from average to something better as you go along.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#26

Post by SMFloris »

jacquesm wrote: post #22
emerongi wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He needed to evaluate the team based on some criteria one way or another. He chose certain criteria and used the computer to assist him in the evaluation. Another option would be to choose the team on who you just "like the most". Maybe this would have been more to your liking? It's more human, I guess. However, notice that there is still a criteria and still an evaluation phase, you can't avoid it (unless you pick b…

He should have realized that he lacked the knowledge and experience to tell his boss to fuck off because on day #2 on the job you simply can not make this decision in a way that won't kill the company.

It is pretty interesting how this conversation goes.

CTO: I can't do that on my 2nd day.

CEO: I thought your interests align with the company. It is your job to align everyone under you to our direction.

CTO: Yes, of course. Right away.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#28

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #22
emerongi wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He needed to evaluate the team based on some criteria one way or another. He chose certain criteria and used the computer to assist him in the evaluation. Another option would be to choose the team on who you just "like the most". Maybe this would have been more to your liking? It's more human, I guess. However, notice that there is still a criteria and still an evaluation phase, you can't avoid it (unless you pick b…

He should have realized that he lacked the knowledge and experience to tell his boss to fuck off because on day #2 on the job you simply can not make this decision in a way that won't kill the company.

[deleted]

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#29

Post by sdoering »

jacquesm wrote: post #14

Junior CTO shows how to create short term value without realizing the long term consequences of his actions, and proceeds to grandstand to help create his own personal brand so that he can get invited to do the same elsewhere. I give this company another 3 months at best before it implodes.

For me it read like somebody is trying to emulate "The Phoenix Project" but massively lacking experience, empathy and about everything necessary to be (good) in such a position.

I wasn't sure if I was reading a satirical take on a lot of grandstanding out there. But reading the comments here the author probably means it to be taken at face value.

Re: CTO day 2: downsizing the team

#30

Post by m463 »

crispyambulance wrote: post #19

There's a common consequence to staff cuts that OP did not seem to consider: when cuts occur, OTHERS take that as a signal to leave. He just blindsided his staff on "day 2", it could easily happen that another 2,3,4, or more people are now planning to GTFO before they're next. All that careful planning will then be for shit because he just cut to the bone, and then the bones will start leaving. There's no easy way to…

He was told to downsize, which means there's someone above him not owning it.
Post reply on HN