Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sounds very cool. Were failures punished by low ratings, bonus? How did they incentivize taking risks? Did the focus on being a leader make you stronger? Were Netflix employees from then valued very highly?
Netflix was known for being very fast to fire if you stopped producing. Netflix didn't even value Netflix employees beyond what they could produce in the moment. They leaned into the zero loyalty to employees model that US corporations rely on. Read this article which is pushing this as a positive. Grep for "Tell the Truth About Performance" to see where they talk about changing what an employees job needed. An emplo…
How a startup loses its spark
271–280 of 287 posts
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#272Whenever I read something like this I roll my eyes and assume the person writing it is either pretty junior or the specific founder type who has weirdly dysfunctional expectations about why their employees work for them. I think a lot of this stems from the bizarre culture of the SF tech world, but outside that bubble people do not really think about their jobs in this way. I emphasize _job_ here. The best devs I've…
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s what the non-engineers are doing though, and it’s not work everyone should do. Engineers should do engineering things at startups because nobody else can.
That's naive. A competent well rounded human is far more of an asset than an engineer who can't handle anything else. I would never want to work with an engineer who had no good sense about anything else unless I had to, like if there was some skill only they had.
If you have a nonfounder engineer, that person for sure shouldn’t just be doing whatever it is they feel like doing. They need to allow the founders to drive.
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#274As soon as you start dealing with large customers, these things become inevitable. People can’t start doing whatever they like because it becomes riskier to do it. What might be good for that one customer may not be good for the big customers you actually need to keep to make a profitable business. Big customers always want to know about the roadmap.
That depends on what kind of large customers you're doing business with. If a customer is large enough, and their pockets deep enough, you can absolutely justify building what is good only for that customer, and shipping it only to that customer. Keep that branch separate from the general-purpose product you're selling to the pleebs.
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely. To start with, leaders must not be afraid of their teams making mistakes. Copying from another comment: "Netflix's culture demands very strong leadership and probably works only when the company is small enough. From CEO and down, leaders in every level need to know how to set context for their teams, give enough freedom to their teams, while making sure failures are manageable and success rate are maximi…
Someone just forwarded this to me. It's absolutely a true story and it changed the course of my career as well as starting Netflix OSS. I'm forever grateful to Yuri and Ruslan Meshenberg for their support.
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#276Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds like the opposite of what the author had in mind. The cowboy coder is the one with spark, and the need to "transition into a role more suitable for a growing company" is the problem.
Companies change, and if you can't adapt then the problem is you. Being able to work together with your peers and not alienate them is not too much of an ask.
Scapegoat mechanism.
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#277Re: How a startup loses its spark
#278What is the survival rate of companies 50 years? The author himself points out that as your organization grows, you become more risk-averse. You have more to lose, but that also means you have something.
When John Qian throws 60% of his total assets at a problem, you can get a few intoxicated engineers to work hard at it and have a lot of fun doing it. What if Amazon, or Home Depot, threw 60% of their assets at an entirely new idea every few months? It doesn't make any sense.
Startups fail all the time because they are doing risky things. Successful businesses take less risk and fail less often. You're taking a strategy that has proven to not work and saying it should work.
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#279Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's naive. A competent well rounded human is far more of an asset than an engineer who can't handle anything else. I would never want to work with an engineer who had no good sense about anything else unless I had to, like if there was some skill only they had.
Great soapbox; not at all how the real world of startups operates, however. If you have a nonfounder engineer, that person for sure shouldn’t just be doing whatever it is they feel like doing. They need to allow the founders to drive.
Re: How a startup loses its spark
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great soapbox; not at all how the real world of startups operates, however. If you have a nonfounder engineer, that person for sure shouldn’t just be doing whatever it is they feel like doing. They need to allow the founders to drive.
Nobody claimed or believes that an engineer "should be doing whatever it is they feel like doing". You've misread what you're arguing against and assumed it is saying something it very much isn't.
The comment is wrong, both in theory and in practice.