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

Why he is there and I am here

thestartuptoolkit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#11

Post by davidw »

hjw wrote: post #10
davidw wrote: post #7

Well... sorry, but without more details, that's just fluff. * How did they handle the stuff they weren't good at? * Was this tested with other people? Is it possible to apply the method to people who were previously doing stuff they weren't good at and see results? * With a startup, that does not have much money, the founders are responsible for doing everything. Presumably, they are not good at all of it. What shoul…

I think he means the general field of the startup catered to his skill set, not the entirety of the project. Also with X amount of founders presumably if one person cannot say design the site, maybe another once can. I would assume not all of his cofounders have exactly the same skill sets, but complimentary ones.

Well I'd rather not make assumptions and guesses, I want to read about how things worked out.

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#12

Post by hjw »

davidw wrote: post #11
hjw wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he means the general field of the startup catered to his skill set, not the entirety of the project. Also with X amount of founders presumably if one person cannot say design the site, maybe another once can. I would assume not all of his cofounders have exactly the same skill sets, but complimentary ones.

Well I'd rather not make assumptions and guesses, I want to read about how things worked out.

You are right, and my comment was fairly speculative. I see it more as a motivational piece though.

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#13

Post by seren »

lazyjones wrote: post #6
henrik_w wrote: post #2

Yes, focus on your strengths. I like this quote: "For years I have urged managers to concentrate their efforts in areas in which they are strong and to waste as little effort as possible trying to improve the areas in which they don't have much competence." Peter Drucker (1909 - 2005), Austrian author of management-related literature

This is in contrast to a lot of recent advice on improving cognitive skills, which tells us to do things that are hard, not those we are already good at (basically the old specialist vs. generalist debate).

I think that the rationale is that if you are already good at something, you probably like to work in that area, and it won't be a chore to become even better at it, you can become more "naturally" better.

I heard in recent coaching/leadership training that, as human beings, we have a tendency to focus on our weakness or negative feedback, even if you got some positive feedback at the same time. So it can cloud you judgement on how to improve because you miss the big picture.

But it is more in an overall development sense, and is rather orthogonal to develop cognitive skills or brain training.

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#14

Post by henrik_w »

shubhamjain wrote: post #9
henrik_w wrote: post #2

Yes, focus on your strengths. I like this quote: "For years I have urged managers to concentrate their efforts in areas in which they are strong and to waste as little effort as possible trying to improve the areas in which they don't have much competence." Peter Drucker (1909 - 2005), Austrian author of management-related literature

Another quote that comes immediately in my mind: "97% of advice is worthless.". Honestly, I can't think of any reason why a person must not extend his / her scope to different activities.

Or "A witty saying proves nothing" (Voltaire).

Taking myself as an example: I like programming, and I am good at it. I don't like administration. So I don't try to become a manager, or a project manager or similar. I am sure I could if I tried, but I would not be very good at it. So for me it works out really well to focus on my strengths (making sure I am as good of a programmer as I can be). The result is that I program every day and enjoy it.

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#16

Post by 6d0debc071 »

seren wrote: post #13
lazyjones wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is in contrast to a lot of recent advice on improving cognitive skills, which tells us to do things that are hard, not those we are already good at (basically the old specialist vs. generalist debate).

I think that the rationale is that if you are already good at something, you probably like to work in that area, and it won't be a chore to become even better at it, you can become more "naturally" better. I heard in recent coaching/leadership training that, as human beings, we have a tendency to focus on our weakness or negative feedback, even if you got some positive feedback at the same time. So it can cloud you j…

Comparative advantage[1] would be reason enough by itself. Why invest in becoming a good programmer if you're bad at programming if you'll probably never be as super-great at it as someone who found it easy and does it all the time? It would make more sense for you to work on something you're already really good at and trade with them to get the code you want.

In terms of the generalist vs specialist thing I'm reminded of the idea of T-shaped people. Broad general competence to allow you to meaningfully be part of the system, and deep specific competence to allow you a comparative edge.

Always end up wondering what the trade-offs are on how deep the tail of that is compared to the height of the top though.

1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_advantage

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#18

Post by patio11 »

In general, I've found it a bit more helpful to think "Where do I want to go and what is the clear next step to a place closer to there than where I am today?" rather than "Why am I not like this other person who I am not like?" It's less disempowering and more actionable.

Bully for the gentleman who lives in Costa Rica. His success in no way makes you worse off. If you presently do not have a software business, and you want to some day have a software business, there's a very short list of things I could recommend to you. Writing software and selling software are at the top of the list.

If you want to run a software agency, your two tasks are stuffing the pipeline and delivering engagements. If you don't have an engagement yet, find an engagement, preferably one which will provide you a client/project that has citation value in dealing with new clients. You then go on a cycle of stuff pipeline to bursting / hire new employees to deliver engagements / stuff pipeline to bursting / etc.

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#19

Post by frobozz »

This is somewhat impotent advice, you don't just magically make money by giving up everything you're no good at. There are two reasons for this:

1) I'm good at making things. I'm bad at sales, marketing, hiring and delegation. I concentrate all my efforts on making things. Where's my 5 million?

2) You have to give it a reasonable punt. For example, there would be no professional musicians if everyone followed this advice. No one picks up a guitar or bassoon and declares themselves "good" straight away.

Re: Why he is there and I am here

#20

Post by triskweline »

Only doing what you're good at seems at odd with running a start-up, where almost by definition you need to fight through stuff you don't like or excel in.

If you're persistent you will eventually get to "design" your own job, but that's some years down the road. If you want to concentrate on the things you are good at today, look for a nice 9-to-5 job at a company that matches your values and don't look back.

Post reply on HN