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

You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#31

Post by GFK_of_xmaspast »

markbnj wrote: post #29
Delmania wrote: post #23

>Technology tends to separate normal from natural. Our bodies weren't designed to eat the foods that people in rich countries eat, or to get so little exercise. There may be a similar problem with the way we work: a normal job may be as bad for us intellectually as white flour or sugar is for us physically. It's not technology, it's society. The notion of "working from 9 to 5 until 65" is a relatively recent construc…

>> It's not technology, it's society. The notion of "working from 9 to 5 until 65" is a relatively recent construct brought on by the industrial revolution. I'll buy this if by "brought on by the industrial revolution" you mean "demanded by organized workers in response to the excesses of the industrial revolution." If it weren't for unions I don't think the 40 hour work week would be anything like the norm.

If not for unions it would be 'work from 7 to 7 until dead.'

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#32

Post by gress »

We aren't meant to have bosses, but we are social animals who are meant to work in groups. Groups often do need leaders who are able to synthesize a path that is mutually beneficial and help people to work in concert.

The problem is that we have developed economic structures that make it hard for individuals to reject bosses who are not leaders.

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#33

Post by Retra »

thewarrior wrote: post #14
panarky wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Case study: At Sears, Eddie Lampert's Warring Divisions Model Adds to the Troubles Eddie Lampert’s big idea is that markets and competition rool, so he’s forcing the different parts of Sears to compete for resources just as if they were independent firms, with individual division profitability the only criterion for success. ... If the different divisions of Sears have no common interests, if the best model is compet…

My own company works this way. It's absolutely ridiculous. Each division hoards good programmers , projects and expertise, and people sometimes get stuck in other divisions without much work , while a few efficiently managed divisions land all the good work , leading to all the good people in the poor divisons leaving because they aren't growing , it's almost like working in a different company if you're in a differe…

I am a bit mystified as to where people get the idea that competition is fundamentally better than cooperation. The only time competition has ever done any good is when it leads to greater cooperation.

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#34

Post by akamaka »

swombat wrote: post #19
mrbgty wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

github too http://www.fastcompany.com/3020181/open-company/inside-githu...

And Morning Star, Zappos, Stripe, Medium, Semco, W L Gore, Whole Foods, and others... http://danieltenner.com/open-cultures

Also, the guy who founded VISA has spent his later years putting forward ideas on how build large organizations that still maintain the anarchic qualities which allow independance from too much central control.

https://books.google.ca/books/about/Birth_of_the_chaordic_ag...

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#35

Post by Retra »

nhaehnle wrote: post #15
amelius wrote: post #9

> Another thing you notice when you see animals in the wild is that each species thrives in groups of a certain size. This is another reason why we should really limit companies to a maximum size. Other reasons are that companies should not become too big to fail, and that smaller companies lead to a more modular economy, where one company uses the outputs of several other companies, instead of having a few MegaCorps…

smaller companies lead to a more modular economy This is a very interesting point, which I would extend to saying that it might lead to a more resilient economy. The trouble is, scale is such a powerful thing. When you look at industries like the automobile industry, or even inside technology the chip industry, you appreciate that. It's hard to imagine modern fabs being run by groups of less than 100 people, for exam…

I always imagined a system where companies could only get so large unless they had a charter for a big project. (Which would expire, and they'd have to break up.)

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#36

Post by astazangasta »

falcolas wrote: post #12

Sure, because no hunter/gatherer tribes had a chief, medicine woman or other revered person who both gave direction to their tribe, and to whom the tribe was responsible. A pretty weak argument against bosses. Humans naturally tend to form hierarchies - the boss is simply one node in that hierarchy. That some people thrive in such positions doesn't mean it's our natural state.

Humans don't naturally form hierarchies. At least I don't always look to an authority figure to tell me what to do. I usually want independence and creative space, along with the advice and aid of knowledgeable colleagues. I chafe under the yoke of arbitrary authority.

But maybe I'm not human.

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#37

Post by jacquesm »

musesum wrote: post #18

Animal analogy is interesting. Any animals that cultivate crops? Are there any Human hunter/gatherer societies that scaled? Here's a snippet of dialog from one of my favorite movies: Jeremiah Johnson: You wouldn't happen to know what month of the year it is? Bear Claw: Why no, I truly wouldn't. I'm sorry, pilgrim. Winter's a long time going? Jeremiah Johnson: [exhausted] Ah. Bear Claw: Stays long this high. Jeremiah…

> Any animals that cultivate crops?

Yes. Some species of Ant domesticate fungii, there are crabs that cultivate bacteria and there are fish that farm Algae (damselfish).

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#38

Post by Delmania »

markbnj wrote: post #29
Delmania wrote: post #23

>Technology tends to separate normal from natural. Our bodies weren't designed to eat the foods that people in rich countries eat, or to get so little exercise. There may be a similar problem with the way we work: a normal job may be as bad for us intellectually as white flour or sugar is for us physically. It's not technology, it's society. The notion of "working from 9 to 5 until 65" is a relatively recent construc…

>> It's not technology, it's society. The notion of "working from 9 to 5 until 65" is a relatively recent construct brought on by the industrial revolution. I'll buy this if by "brought on by the industrial revolution" you mean "demanded by organized workers in response to the excesses of the industrial revolution." If it weren't for unions I don't think the 40 hour work week would be anything like the norm.

It's a bit more nuanced than that. Unions played a role most certainly, but so did some industrialists like George Johnson. I believe the term is welfare capitalism.

But yes, the 40 hour work week was definitely put in place to ensure people weren't just worked to the bone and then discarded.

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#39

Post by overgard »

I agree with the diagnosis, but there's something important that's omitted here: the point of a startup is to create the type of large business that PG is advising against joining. The entire point of a startup is exponential growth. A company that stays small is generally derided as a "lifestyle business" and Silicon Valley investors seemingly have absolutely no interest in funding that sort venture, even if it's more sustainable for most people.

Re: You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

#40

Post by thewarrior »

Retra wrote: post #33
thewarrior wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My own company works this way. It's absolutely ridiculous. Each division hoards good programmers , projects and expertise, and people sometimes get stuck in other divisions without much work , while a few efficiently managed divisions land all the good work , leading to all the good people in the poor divisons leaving because they aren't growing , it's almost like working in a different company if you're in a differe…

I am a bit mystified as to where people get the idea that competition is fundamentally better than cooperation. The only time competition has ever done any good is when it leads to greater cooperation.

That's not always true. Competition always produces better performance , atleast in individual activities.
Post reply on HN