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

Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 98 posts

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#81

Post by kybernetikos »

xasos wrote: post #29
brador wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it as Peter saying hire for culture, Mark saying hire for talent.

That's how I took it as well. I remember reading from Max Levchin (?) that a company should hire people exactly like them, culturally, early on. This helps reduce unnecessary conflict when the only thing you're focused on is growth. A prime example is why early startup employees come from the same school as the founders. I think later on, bigger companies focus on talent and culture equally (for the most part).

Hiring people culturally similar may sounds sensible in theory, but it may not be sensible in practice.

I haven't seen stats on startup hiring, but I read this about investment, which in my opinion stands a good chance of having a similar effect:

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/7069.html

"The probability of a successful exit outcome decreases by 18 percent if two venture capitalists who previously worked at the same company partner up in the syndication.

The likelihood of success drops by 22 percent if co-investors attended the same undergraduate school.

The negative effect of shared affinity is even stronger when it relates to ethnicity: Collaborating with someone from the same ethnic minority group comes at the expense of a 25 percent reduction in performance."

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#82

Post by prodigal_erik »

kybernetikos wrote: post #81
xasos wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's how I took it as well. I remember reading from Max Levchin (?) that a company should hire people exactly like them, culturally, early on. This helps reduce unnecessary conflict when the only thing you're focused on is growth. A prime example is why early startup employees come from the same school as the founders. I think later on, bigger companies focus on talent and culture equally (for the most part).

Hiring people culturally similar may sounds sensible in theory, but it may not be sensible in practice. I haven't seen stats on startup hiring, but I read this about investment, which in my opinion stands a good chance of having a similar effect: http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/7069.html "The probability of a successful exit outcome decreases by 18 percent if two venture capitalists who previously worked at the same compan…

Maybe investors are more properly skeptical about dumb opportunities proposed by someone with a dissimilar background. Founders and employees have a much greater need to work together day-to-day and trust each others' judgment.

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#83

Post by dataker »

michalu wrote: post #72
dataker wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem comes when MBAs, generally without technical background, build companies without real value and expand an already existing bubble.

Indeed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wharton_School_alumni with all due respect it's a bit tiring to hear about all those 'uselss MBA' stereotypes. There's a substance to it but I start to feel that 9 out of 10 comments like this one reflect the insecurity of the author rather than anything else. One of the people not mentioned on the list is founder of Warby Parker - surely he contributed to the bubble by bui…

With all due respect, if you're a MBA, you've just followed such stereotype.

So what I didn't even graduate college? I'm proud to have built a company whose employees are happy and treated with dignity. Diligence, respect and passion drove people like me to success, not a HBS MBA.

From experience, that's not what usually happens with MBAs. Because of an 'alumni list' or a privileged network, many feel entitled to success and will do anything to reach their goals(often unethically).

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#84

Post by jblow »

jeffdavis wrote: post #76
dantheman wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The competition is for losers, in my understanding is saying don't enter a competitive market where you're not going to change it. For example, don't start a restaurant or a store -- unless you're going to be extremely different.

"Competition is for losers" seems like pretty weak reasoning to me. As far as I can tell, it goes something like: Success is not random. Therefore, if you are successful, there is something different about you. Therefore, you are a monopolist. Therefore, competition can't make you successful. But that's not very helpful. Every business on the planet can claim some kind of differentiation -- maybe their supply chain i…

That is not remotely the whole argument. The argument is really about the fact that competition ultimately drives profit margin to zero. See his other writings for details.

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#85

Post by s73v3r »

ignoramous wrote: post #15
matt4077 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some say "owning the means of production" is such a formula. There's certainly a lot of opportunity in technology right now, but capitalism doesn't guarantee such a state. The net neutrality debate is very explicitly about keeping the market open to newcomers.

The software field is very picky in what it thinks is right... for instance, iron grip of Apple over the entire iOS eco-system is fine with most developers who'd continue to build on their platform, whilst any such move by a company that isn't really in the tech scene as much (like the ISPs) is scrutinized to hell and back.

One has a choice on whether to use Apple or not. In the US, at least, one rarely has choice in their ISP, especially if they want something with any kind of speed. Hence, them trying to exert an iron grip over what people are allowed to access is far more damning.

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#86

Post by s73v3r »

ryanSrich wrote: post #48
dataker wrote: post #10

>And I think it’s interesting to explore how unusual that is relative to many other areas of technology, because there are so many innovations that were good for society but the people who came up with them ended up with very little. Okay, co-founders sometimes end up with a fair amount money. However, early employees that actually built the company are often forgotten and given a relatively small sum of money. Not s…

If you're an employee hoping to make it rich by working on someone else's startup you're doing it wrong. Work for someone else because you need steady pay. Work for someone else because you appreciate what they're doing. If you want to make a lot of money you need to take risks. Start your own startup. Go 4+ years without a salary. The co founders might not be the ones actually building the product but they're the on…

Why are we rewarding someone who's "taking a risk" rather than the people who are actually doing the work?

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#87

Post by eru »

ThomPete wrote: post #59
gaius wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of gender or ethnicity, if everyone you hire is a 20-something graduate of the same top-10 CS programmes what you get is... Google+ (or Wave or Buzz...) Diversity means you don't get trapped in an echo chamber.

Wave was not by a 20-something but by a 40-something. Age has nothing to do with that (the 40-something that lead Wave also created Maps)

And Wave was pretty cool. As a startup it might have even succeeded.

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#88

Post by fogleman »

> Q. Some people outside Silicon Valley see it as a place that is not really in touch with the rest of the country. Does that ring true to you in any way?

> A. There is a big disconnect, because you have this sense of stagnation and slow growth in many other places, and you have this incredible boom in Silicon Valley.

This makes me think he doesn't get it...

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#89

Post by foobarian »

k__ wrote: post #26
Xcelerate wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I would join a startup that wasn't founded by people with some kind of technical degree.

Same here. But it seems to be a thing. Best email I got from a start-up that wanted to hire me went something like this: "We are a team of 5 MBAs with an idea and need you to be our employee #1 to build it!" I mean 5 founders seems rather excessive to me but all of them MBAs and the only technical person will be an employee and not a co founder.

Maybe it's not such a bad idea. Someone has to do the no-fun work of sales, promotion, taxes, etc., might be nice to have a bunch of MBAs around to do that. Could also ask for 40% equity or so.

Re: Peter Thiel on what works at work (2014)

#90

Post by vonklaus »

modfodder wrote: post #70
hliyan wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this advice was given with the assumption that the receiver is an intelligent human being.

There are many intelligent human beings who suffer from many forms of gender and/or race bias. Our very nature as humans is to surround ourselves with people who look, act, and think like us. Hiring people that could be your friends without having the insight to get beyond the inherent bias in all of us could very easily lead to a corporate structure that is extremely myopic. Not that it won't be successful, just end…

Hiring someone for the sake of diversity is absolutely stupid. Also, not sure what you are on about? The advice is to hire someone who you could get a beer or shoot a game of pool with after work and carry a non-awkward conversation and talk about overlapping interests. A person of any gender or nationality could potentially fit this bill.
Post reply on HN