9 ms·

‘Give Away Your Legos’ and Other Commandments for Scaling Startups

126 points by astdb 11y ago

pbreit 11y ago
I dunno, hopping on board the rocket ship still seems a lot easier than building the rocket ship.
- cableshaft 11y ago
  But building the rocket ship is more fun. Especially if you know it's going to explode midair once it's launched and you don't have to be in it when it does.
URSpider94 11y ago
Great article, this is absolutely true. My greatest managers and mentors have been the ones who delegated a domain to me without micromanaging or meddling -- it made me feel valued, as well as let me know I was fully accountable for the outcome. Meanwhile, they were free to focus on other areas of the business, or even pursue new opportunities. For myself, I once had to forego an assignment that I wanted because my boss didn't think he could do without me. This was a wake-up call for me that I needed to "hire my replacement" to give me the ability to move on.
vkjv 11y ago
> "During her 4+ years at Facebook, the company exploded from 500 employees serving 80 million users to 5,500 employees and over 1.1 billion users." Tangential to the article. But, I find it kind of surprising that the employee to user base growth was linear. I would expect it to be closer to logarithmic in a well run company. Although I have no data points. Am I off base?
- zevyoura 11y ago
  Facebook does a whole lot more now than they did when there were 80M users. I think if they provided the same functionality over the years this would be more concerning.
- ra1n85 11y ago
  Sorry for the nitpick, but is it logarithmic or exponential in this case? To the point, I would not be surprised if 5,500 was the "settling" point. In my experience, the hiring pendulum takes some time to swing far enough to include an adequate number of employees in a rapidly scaling environment. (e.g., I would not be surprised if 500 million users were served by 750 employees.)
  - zeckalpha 11y ago
    Further more, without a third datapoint, it will always be linear. Unless you're including 0,0?
  - ByronT 11y ago
    I think he meant the number of employees and the number of users remained proportional.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
shostack 11y ago
>"Adding people doesn’t mean there’s less work for the people that are already there. It means that the entire company can do more." I wish the article expanded further on this in the section on firing beyond the mantra of "fire fast." Taking the infamous Netflix presentation as an example, there may be plenty of other jobs that need to be done at the company, but the reality is the generalist wearing multiple may need to be swapped for a specialist wearing one or two. So there may not be any other jobs for that generalist, and it isn't necessarily a critique of their performance. While the article touches briefly on this, it doesn't seem to follow through and connect it with the examples of questions/concerns people voice during phases of growth and team changes. Unfortunately, unless it is deeply ingrained in the culture, it is often not a great approach as a manager to tell a team "well, your concerns are justified and we'll be evaluating whether there's still opportunities that are a good fit for you here." But that is ultimately the candid answer I think a lot of employees might be looking for in response to the sorts of questions the article gives as examples.
- hobs 11y ago
  As a generalist, my company has got around this issue by having me bushwack new stuff while the specialists come and take over doing all the things I was doing (but better.) I imagine at some point I will no longer be useful and I can leave the company entirely doing some occasional consulting for them. As a generalist, I welcome this day and look forward to another place to whip into shape.
- x5n1 11y ago
  Your reasons are exactly why I would not get into an early stage startup as a generalist without a lot of equity. Too many "rationalist" managers out there that think the way you suggest. Despite the fact the generalist provided a valuable service, you don't need them any more, fire away.
- pbreit 11y ago
  It's hard for me to believe that you can't find roles in a growing company for a generalist. My experience has certainly been different.
zeckalpha 11y ago
Cognitive dissonance: This seems true to me, and so does the idea that adding people to a project late in the game makes it later (as per Fred Brooks).
butttransaction 11y ago
There is some good advice buried in this nauseatingly sycophantic puff piece.
- analognoise 11y ago
  I hate the infantilism of modern "tech". We're adults who play in ball pits, have a ping pong table, office Nerf wars, and have our metaphors in Lego format, pre-chewed for easy digestion! And there are plenty of people who eat that shit up. I know a lot of engineers are a bit socially retarded, but is it helping us to progress to accept this infantilization? Can we stop pretending to be "big kids"?
  - LoSboccacc 11y ago
    amen, the faster we can give away with the bros office culture the better. sadly it's central to the silly con valley ploy, so don't expect change to come out from here. there's plenty company out there that value professionalism out of its workforce, but those aren't building cool toys for mid twenties bros.
    - kevinmobrien 11y ago
      Amen here, as well. I've spent the last 17 years working for (and now running) tech startups in Boston; the worst of them ceded all fun to cube farms, but the best of them never went all-in on the culture described here. Perhaps there is an east/west coast division here? I look at the folks working alongside me now, building an incredibly sophisticated machine learning engine for cybersecurity, and I wouldn't think to draw upon a Lego metaphor for what they're doing. It's hard, substantive, mathematical work, and certainly not akin to playing with toys. I expect my senior engineers, sales guys, and marketers to be both protective of the brand we're building and understanding of the need to grow fast and expand our teams.
      - err4nt 11y ago
        I live in Toronto and work independently. Productivity = prosperity, and so I live a life of work punctuated by relaxation an rest. Of the tech companies that have tried to woo me, most fall into this infantilization trap and its such a big turn-off. If the reason I should come work with you is because you have a foosball table and on fridays you put a keg in the break room......I want to build things! I want to create. I will take your company and move it forward, I dont have time for ping pong. Shouldnt the goal be to make your comoany rich, so you can be rewarded enough to buy the comforts YOU want, instead of lounging in the comforts of an employer as you work?
dwd 11y ago
One issue: Lego is the plural of Lego. Legos make tomato paste. Sidenote: If you're trying to coin a catchy phrase - make sure it's correct and doesn't play into a grammatical flame war.
- stuaxo 11y ago
  I stopped reading it, it was jarring to see multiple times.
  - willhinsa 11y ago
    I'm really curious; where are you from? Use of the "Legos" plural form here in the United States seems to be by far the majority. What areas in the world get it right?
    - chrisseaton 11y ago
      In the UK we call them lego because we consider it to be a mass noun, like sand rather than sands, and a grain of sand and a piece of lego.
      - dagw 11y ago
        I've heard "Legos" said plenty of times in England. So while it might not be correct it's hardly uncommon.
        fred2133 11y ago
        Weird. Lived here all my life, only time I've ever heard it is in "look at those wacky Yanks" conversations. South coast/London here. Maybe it's regional?
        dagw 11y ago
        Trying to pattern match on my experiences, I might conclude that it's an age thing. People over 40 are more likely to say "Legos" than those under 30.
DonHopkins 11y ago
Reminds me of the time when Sun Microsystems fell apart into several different companies: SunSoft, Sun Labs, etc. Scott McNealy called an all-hands meeting, and made grand sweeping gestures with his arms while imploring everyone: "Stop hugging your trees! Everyone has to let go of their tree! No more tree hugging!" As if we understood what the hell he was talking about because we'd all read the same management self-help books about preventing tree hugging in large corporations that he had, and that by making tree hugging and releasing gestures, everybody would be able to empathize with him and figure out what the the fuck he meant. After the meeting, I confronted my manager: "You never game me a tree! Why didn't I ever get a tree? I want my tree! I promise not to hug it, but I want one too!"

126 points by astdb 11y ago

pbreit 11y ago

I dunno, hopping on board the rocket ship still seems a lot easier than building the rocket ship.

cableshaft 11y ago
But building the rocket ship is more fun. Especially if you know it's going to explode midair once it's launched and you don't have to be in it when it does.

URSpider94 11y ago

Great article, this is absolutely true. My greatest managers and mentors have been the ones who delegated a domain to me without micromanaging or meddling -- it made me feel valued, as well as let me know I was fully accountable for the outcome. Meanwhile, they were free to focus on other areas of the business, or even pursue new opportunities. For myself, I once had to forego an assignment that I wanted because my boss didn't think he could do without me. This was a wake-up call for me that I needed to "hire my replacement" to give me the ability to move on.

vkjv 11y ago

> "During her 4+ years at Facebook, the company exploded from 500 employees serving 80 million users to 5,500 employees and over 1.1 billion users." Tangential to the article. But, I find it kind of surprising that the employee to user base growth was linear. I would expect it to be closer to logarithmic in a well run company. Although I have no data points. Am I off base?

zevyoura 11y ago
Facebook does a whole lot more now than they did when there were 80M users. I think if they provided the same functionality over the years this would be more concerning.
ra1n85 11y ago
Sorry for the nitpick, but is it logarithmic or exponential in this case? To the point, I would not be surprised if 5,500 was the "settling" point. In my experience, the hiring pendulum takes some time to swing far enough to include an adequate number of employees in a rapidly scaling environment. (e.g., I would not be surprised if 500 million users were served by 750 employees.)
- zeckalpha 11y ago
  Further more, without a third datapoint, it will always be linear. Unless you're including 0,0?
- ByronT 11y ago
  I think he meant the number of employees and the number of users remained proportional.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

shostack 11y ago

>"Adding people doesn’t mean there’s less work for the people that are already there. It means that the entire company can do more." I wish the article expanded further on this in the section on firing beyond the mantra of "fire fast." Taking the infamous Netflix presentation as an example, there may be plenty of other jobs that need to be done at the company, but the reality is the generalist wearing multiple may need to be swapped for a specialist wearing one or two. So there may not be any other jobs for that generalist, and it isn't necessarily a critique of their performance. While the article touches briefly on this, it doesn't seem to follow through and connect it with the examples of questions/concerns people voice during phases of growth and team changes. Unfortunately, unless it is deeply ingrained in the culture, it is often not a great approach as a manager to tell a team "well, your concerns are justified and we'll be evaluating whether there's still opportunities that are a good fit for you here." But that is ultimately the candid answer I think a lot of employees might be looking for in response to the sorts of questions the article gives as examples.

hobs 11y ago
As a generalist, my company has got around this issue by having me bushwack new stuff while the specialists come and take over doing all the things I was doing (but better.) I imagine at some point I will no longer be useful and I can leave the company entirely doing some occasional consulting for them. As a generalist, I welcome this day and look forward to another place to whip into shape.
x5n1 11y ago
Your reasons are exactly why I would not get into an early stage startup as a generalist without a lot of equity. Too many "rationalist" managers out there that think the way you suggest. Despite the fact the generalist provided a valuable service, you don't need them any more, fire away.
pbreit 11y ago
It's hard for me to believe that you can't find roles in a growing company for a generalist. My experience has certainly been different.

zeckalpha 11y ago

Cognitive dissonance: This seems true to me, and so does the idea that adding people to a project late in the game makes it later (as per Fred Brooks).

butttransaction 11y ago

There is some good advice buried in this nauseatingly sycophantic puff piece.

analognoise 11y ago
I hate the infantilism of modern "tech". We're adults who play in ball pits, have a ping pong table, office Nerf wars, and have our metaphors in Lego format, pre-chewed for easy digestion! And there are plenty of people who eat that shit up. I know a lot of engineers are a bit socially retarded, but is it helping us to progress to accept this infantilization? Can we stop pretending to be "big kids"?
- LoSboccacc 11y ago
  amen, the faster we can give away with the bros office culture the better. sadly it's central to the silly con valley ploy, so don't expect change to come out from here. there's plenty company out there that value professionalism out of its workforce, but those aren't building cool toys for mid twenties bros.
  - kevinmobrien 11y ago
    Amen here, as well. I've spent the last 17 years working for (and now running) tech startups in Boston; the worst of them ceded all fun to cube farms, but the best of them never went all-in on the culture described here. Perhaps there is an east/west coast division here? I look at the folks working alongside me now, building an incredibly sophisticated machine learning engine for cybersecurity, and I wouldn't think to draw upon a Lego metaphor for what they're doing. It's hard, substantive, mathematical work, and certainly not akin to playing with toys. I expect my senior engineers, sales guys, and marketers to be both protective of the brand we're building and understanding of the need to grow fast and expand our teams.
    - err4nt 11y ago
      I live in Toronto and work independently. Productivity = prosperity, and so I live a life of work punctuated by relaxation an rest. Of the tech companies that have tried to woo me, most fall into this infantilization trap and its such a big turn-off. If the reason I should come work with you is because you have a foosball table and on fridays you put a keg in the break room......I want to build things! I want to create. I will take your company and move it forward, I dont have time for ping pong. Shouldnt the goal be to make your comoany rich, so you can be rewarded enough to buy the comforts YOU want, instead of lounging in the comforts of an employer as you work?

dwd 11y ago

One issue: Lego is the plural of Lego. Legos make tomato paste. Sidenote: If you're trying to coin a catchy phrase - make sure it's correct and doesn't play into a grammatical flame war.

stuaxo 11y ago
I stopped reading it, it was jarring to see multiple times.
- willhinsa 11y ago
  I'm really curious; where are you from? Use of the "Legos" plural form here in the United States seems to be by far the majority. What areas in the world get it right?
  - chrisseaton 11y ago
    In the UK we call them lego because we consider it to be a mass noun, like sand rather than sands, and a grain of sand and a piece of lego.
    - dagw 11y ago
      I've heard "Legos" said plenty of times in England. So while it might not be correct it's hardly uncommon.
      - fred2133 11y ago
        Weird. Lived here all my life, only time I've ever heard it is in "look at those wacky Yanks" conversations. South coast/London here. Maybe it's regional?
        dagw 11y ago
        Trying to pattern match on my experiences, I might conclude that it's an age thing. People over 40 are more likely to say "Legos" than those under 30.

DonHopkins 11y ago

Reminds me of the time when Sun Microsystems fell apart into several different companies: SunSoft, Sun Labs, etc. Scott McNealy called an all-hands meeting, and made grand sweeping gestures with his arms while imploring everyone: "Stop hugging your trees! Everyone has to let go of their tree! No more tree hugging!" As if we understood what the hell he was talking about because we'd all read the same management self-help books about preventing tree hugging in large corporations that he had, and that by making tree hugging and releasing gestures, everybody would be able to empathize with him and figure out what the the fuck he meant. After the meeting, I confronted my manager: "You never game me a tree! Why didn't I ever get a tree? I want my tree! I promise not to hug it, but I want one too!"