Caring about things
romymisra.com
Caring about things
1–10 of 22 posts
Re: Caring about things
#2[deleted]
Re: Caring about things
#3[deleted]
Re: Caring about things
#4While this is a great thing, make sure you support these valuable team members by ensuring the rest of your team also care just as much.
I've had the pleasure to be a part of a team where I was given pretty much free license to do as I saw fit simply because I cared as much about the product as the founders.
But hiring just one or two champions and filling in the gaps with mere enthusiasm or brute force is going to put an enormous strain on your champions.
Re: Caring about things
#5[deleted]
Re: Caring about things
#6I agree with a lot of stuff said here - caring, or intrinsic motivation, is one of the most powerful attributes you can hire for. There are, however, a plethora of other attributes out there, and restricting your potential hires to the tiny subset of people that are as insanely motivated as yourself seems like a recipe for never hiring anyone and paradoxically never actually solving any problems.
Specifically I don't think points 3 and 4 are quite on the money - how much you care is often based on how much you perceive people care about you, and equity can be a pretty big signal of that. Additionally, I think people who care can be quite contentious.
Still, a good enough point to talk about. Apparent enthusiasm is one of the best things you can select for, when you see it, and it can make up for a lot of other things that might be lacking.
Re: Caring about things
#7I agree with a lot of stuff said here - caring, or intrinsic motivation, is one of the most powerful attributes you can hire for. There are, however, a plethora of other attributes out there, and restricting your potential hires to the tiny subset of people that are as insanely motivated as yourself seems like a recipe for never hiring anyone and paradoxically never actually solving any problems. Specifically I don't…
> Additionally, I think people who care can be quite contentious.
People who care will challenge the status quo. This is often deeply unpopular, especially in larger orgs. If you don't empower the people who care to make positive changes to the status quo, then those people will give up and stop caring. And then probably leave.
Re: Caring about things
#8I'd like this to be true, but I think it's a very utopian ideal. If people care as much as the founders do about the company, they're going to get very disillusioned when the founders head in a different direction to the one they'd take the company and they get no say in it. Because although they're as invested in the company as the founders, they don't have the power.
I also wonder why (apart from the charity sector) employees would be that invested. They don't get the financial rewards or the kudos that the founders do, so why invest their soul in someone else's problem?
Re: Caring about things
#9I'd like this to be true, but I think it's a very utopian ideal. If people care as much as the founders do about the company, they're going to get very disillusioned when the founders head in a different direction to the one they'd take the company and they get no say in it . Because although they're as invested in the company as the founders, they don't have the power. I also wonder why (apart from the charity secto…
> why invest their soul in someone else's problem?
Depending on their age, they might not know better. Young developers are sold the ideal of changing the world through passion, but still end up as just employees. I still remember the first time a company offered me options instead of an annual raise, and a more experienced coworker quietly informed me why they did that. My enthusiasm was quickly brought down to earth.
Re: Caring about things
#10I'd like this to be true, but I think it's a very utopian ideal. If people care as much as the founders do about the company, they're going to get very disillusioned when the founders head in a different direction to the one they'd take the company and they get no say in it . Because although they're as invested in the company as the founders, they don't have the power. I also wonder why (apart from the charity secto…
Make employees co-owners. Then they have more incentive to care, and their voice counts in the direction of the company. It's not just someone else's problem anymore.