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

Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

venturefizz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 35 posts

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#11

Post by kyllo »

patrickmay wrote: post #10
michaelochurch wrote: post #8

Warning: Limit Break ahead. (Yeah, you thought I was always Limit Breaking. No, this is a real one.) This is complete and utter douchebaggery and your IQ will drop 5 points if you read it to completion. I'm sorry, but if I'm going to go anywhere near a pre-funding startup, I better fucking have some domain X over which no one will ever fucking be hired above me. Sorry, but if I wanted to work at a company where peopl…

Most successful VCs are not so willing to risk their investment by putting incompetent people into executive positions. The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows. The first salesperson may well not be ready to build a sales team. The accountant might not have the breadth to be a CFO. In addition to mon…

The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows.

Ok, I admit I've never even worked at a startup, so perhaps I'm missing something, but this idea just smells fishy. Why on earth would the lead developer who built a software product from the ground up, possibly single-handedly, not have the "skills and experience" to continue running that codebase as the company grows? Like someone with experience "at scale" and better connections is going to come in later, read/understand all the code the technical co-founder wrote (or perhaps just hire a team to rewrite everything from scratch using a more "scalable" software stack), and take over as CTO, relegating the co-founder to a subordinate role? Has that ever worked?

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#12

Post by tbrownaw »

I would think that being a "Chief $FOO Officer" would require that there be other $FOO Officers in the company, who all report (maybe indirectly) to you.

If your company isn't big enough to have middle management, it's not big enough to have Chief Anything Officers. It's completely nonsensical.

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#13

Post by michaelochurch »

patrickmay wrote: post #10
michaelochurch wrote: post #8

Warning: Limit Break ahead. (Yeah, you thought I was always Limit Breaking. No, this is a real one.) This is complete and utter douchebaggery and your IQ will drop 5 points if you read it to completion. I'm sorry, but if I'm going to go anywhere near a pre-funding startup, I better fucking have some domain X over which no one will ever fucking be hired above me. Sorry, but if I wanted to work at a company where peopl…

Most successful VCs are not so willing to risk their investment by putting incompetent people into executive positions. The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows. The first salesperson may well not be ready to build a sales team. The accountant might not have the breadth to be a CFO. In addition to mon…

Most successful VCs are not so willing to risk their investment by putting incompetent people into executive positions.

Yes and no. I obviously exaggerate the incompetence of such implants. However, let's look at this way. Let's say that I'm an 8/10 for the role (9/10 is where I'm headed, 10/10 is best in the world). No VC is going to risk his investment on a 3/10; that's a 5-point drop. But a 7? A 6 whom he owes a really big favor? A 5 who he seems to think is a 9 because of the 5's superior social skills? Quite likely, yes. The VC would rather have a personal friend at 7-level competence than me at 8. And while 8's and 9's are really rare, 6's and 7's aren't uncommon, and the VC has plenty of 5+ in his network.

I know that I'm really solid at a lot of things. I also know that, while my level of talent may be rare and high, "close enough" is not rare for most purposes. I can't afford to kid myself and underestimate the competition. And to be frank about it, there are a lot of roles in which a 6 and an 8 are interchangeable.

The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows. The first salesperson may well not be ready to build a sales team. The accountant might not have the breadth to be a CFO.

I'm sure that's true, taking a pragmatic approach, but I also think that's often used as an excuse to throw people under the bus.

Often, the short-term compromises and stress levels cause a situation where good people end up ineligible for the top roles. The guy who pissed off 2/5 of the team by pushing what turned out to be the right decision has too many enemies to be CTO, and the person who built the original system under extreme time pressure is ineligible for VP/Eng because the system is starting to strain.

That happens, and some of it's inevitable, but if someone's going to be hired above me, I want it to be with my consent and voluntary abdication. I'll gladly step down if it's the right thing to do; but I prefer having a say in how it happens. Otherwise, you might as well just fire me.

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#14

Post by [deleted] »

michaelochurch wrote: post #8

Warning: Limit Break ahead. (Yeah, you thought I was always Limit Breaking. No, this is a real one.) This is complete and utter douchebaggery and your IQ will drop 5 points if you read it to completion. I'm sorry, but if I'm going to go anywhere near a pre-funding startup, I better fucking have some domain X over which no one will ever fucking be hired above me. Sorry, but if I wanted to work at a company where peopl…

[deleted]

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#15

Post by tptacek »

michaelochurch wrote: post #8

Warning: Limit Break ahead. (Yeah, you thought I was always Limit Breaking. No, this is a real one.) This is complete and utter douchebaggery and your IQ will drop 5 points if you read it to completion. I'm sorry, but if I'm going to go anywhere near a pre-funding startup, I better fucking have some domain X over which no one will ever fucking be hired above me. Sorry, but if I wanted to work at a company where peopl…

I like the idea of looking for companies where one is explicitly guaranteed to be the asymptote of competence.

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#16

Post by tbrownaw »

tptacek wrote: post #15
michaelochurch wrote: post #8

Warning: Limit Break ahead. (Yeah, you thought I was always Limit Breaking. No, this is a real one.) This is complete and utter douchebaggery and your IQ will drop 5 points if you read it to completion. I'm sorry, but if I'm going to go anywhere near a pre-funding startup, I better fucking have some domain X over which no one will ever fucking be hired above me. Sorry, but if I wanted to work at a company where peopl…

I like the idea of looking for companies where one is explicitly guaranteed to be the asymptote of competence.

Sounds great for the ego, but wouldn't it be harder to learn things if none of your coworkers are allowed to be better than (or even as good as) you?

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#17

Post by michaelochurch »

kyllo wrote: post #11
patrickmay wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most successful VCs are not so willing to risk their investment by putting incompetent people into executive positions. The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows. The first salesperson may well not be ready to build a sales team. The accountant might not have the breadth to be a CFO. In addition to mon…

The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows. Ok, I admit I've never even worked at a startup, so perhaps I'm missing something, but this idea just smells fishy. Why on earth would the lead developer who built a software product from the ground up, possibly single-handedly, not have the "skills and experi…

I think that his argument is that, as the job of CTO becomes more of a management/connections role, it's better to have someone else in it.

I actually agree. The right people to build a business are often not the right people to maintain it at maturity. I'd want the title of "CTO" if building someone's product, but I would agree to abdicate it if I agreed with the choice of successor, and was genuinely convinced he'd do a better job than I could. I just wouldn't be happy not to have a say in it. I want to be able to say, "if you hire him above me, then I leave and you just had a CTO quit".

Titles make it hard to demote or fire someone because if they punt you, they just "fired their CTO". You want a title because when millions (and potentially billions) are on the line you can't trust people in power, even if you think you've known them for years.

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#18

Post by tptacek »

tbrownaw wrote: post #16
tptacek wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I like the idea of looking for companies where one is explicitly guaranteed to be the asymptote of competence.

Sounds great for the ego, but wouldn't it be harder to learn things if none of your coworkers are allowed to be better than (or even as good as) you?

Yep.

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#19

Post by mhurron »

OldSchool wrote: post #3

Yes, yes, and yes. Owner, Founder, maybe President, but CxO just looks ridiculous. Way too many one-person company CEOs out there. I believe this title grab began when CEOs started getting skewered in the media for being overpaid. End result, lots of free titles self-dubbed. I suppose that had the positive effect of lowering -average- CEO pay everywhere :)

CXO titles in any small business look ridiculous. I worked at a small company where the 'IT Manager' over 3 people (developer, junior developer, system administrator) called himself the CIO. Why? So he could demand a salary that (along with the owner/CEO, the accountant/CFO and floor manager/COO) crippled the company and so it would look better when he moved on. Of course, now that he was a CXO level, he just sat on his ass, drank coffee and made promises to the company owner that everyone else had to make happen, so he looked good.

CXO positions being grabbed at small companies is a sign of a group of dysfunctional, self-congratulating morons looking to ride this to other places willing to pay them even more to be called CXO.

Re: Minimize use of CxO titles at early company stages

#20

Post by kyllo »

michaelochurch wrote: post #17
kyllo wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact is that often the lead developer who builds the first version of a product does not have the skills and experience to be the CTO as the company grows. Ok, I admit I've never even worked at a startup, so perhaps I'm missing something, but this idea just smells fishy. Why on earth would the lead developer who built a software product from the ground up, possibly single-handedly, not have the "skills and experi…

I think that his argument is that, as the job of CTO becomes more of a management/connections role, it's better to have someone else in it. I actually agree. The right people to build a business are often not the right people to maintain it at maturity. I'd want the title of "CTO" if building someone's product, but I would agree to abdicate it if I agreed with the choice of successor, and was genuinely convinced he'd…

Right, the key distinction being that in your scenario, the title change is entirely voluntary, and even beneficial from the perspective of the technical co-founder, because he wants to continue working on the codebase rather than having his time taken up by all the politician duties that C*O roles entail.

I think in the OP, it seemed like more of a "you shouldn't let your first developer be the CTO because you want to be able to hire someone more experienced above him when your startup gets big enough to attract real rockstar talent" type of angle. Which, as you pointed out, is repulsive.

Post reply on HN