7 ms·

Honest question: how did someone with such an abusive management style lead his company to success? I'd think that his employees would just leave and go work el

Honest question: how did someone with such an abusive management style lead his company to success? I'd think that his employees would just leave and go work elsewhere.

dboreham 11y ago
Because behaving like this is moderately correlated with success. You don't have to be an asshole to succeed in business, but it can help.
- asdfologist 11y ago
  Yes but I'm asking how. If you piss off your employees and they leave, how do you grow your business into a multibillion-dollar company?
  - w1ntermute 11y ago
    Because not that many employees actually left, despite being pissed off. There was no way the Valley élite would let one of their own (Tony Fadell) have a hard fall, so at least a semi-successful exit was guaranteed from the beginning. The reason why Jobs and Fadell could be assholes and still succeed is because they were/are Jobs/Fadell. That doesn't mean you or I can act like assholes and still succeed. Perhaps we could be assholes after we succeed, but that's a highly unlikely hypothetical.
    - aledalgrande 11y ago
      I agree. I've seen a*holes who were nobodies, and they went nowhere. This is because he is Tony Fadell.
    - xenadu02 11y ago
      I'd also point out that Jobs was know to have become less of an asshole by the time he returned to Apple. Some people think it was reconnecting to his family that helped but who knows. You can demand greatness without being an asshole. You can tell someone the work they did isn't good enough without being an asshole. You can also truthfully review someone's bad code without being an asshole, for what it's worth. Being an asshole != "telling it like it is" though most people confuse the two.
      - potatolicious 11y ago
        > "Being an asshole != "telling it like it is" though most people confuse the two." This reminds me of an old quote. "People who are brutally honest generally enjoy the brutality more than the honesty."
        bobby_9x 11y ago
        I've also seen honesty being confused with being an 'asshole'. You tell someone something they don't want to hear, but need to hear, and you are now known as an asshole.
        st3v3r 11y ago
        Not usually. People who do that think they're saying something that someone needs to hear, but they're usually either wrong, or saying it in a manner that does make them an asshole.
        bobby_9x 11y ago
        I disagree. Most people don’t want to hear the truth and will take anything they don’t want to hear as a personal attack against them. I’ve seen it time and time again.. and then pushed out on social media to make the person that said it look like the bad guy...and since it’s usually one person against another, it’s impossible to defend. This is why when the technology gets cheap enough, I will have a secret body cam on me at all times. It’s already been proven many times that privacy no longer matters. Hell, a guy got an entire basketball team taken away from him based on private conversations.
        dogecoinbase 11y ago
        This is why when the technology gets cheap enough, I will have a secret body cam on me at all times. "...you are now known as an asshole."
        st3v3r 11y ago
  - bschilke 11y ago
    Could it be that the people that report to a Fadell/Jobs are very talented and are able to absorb the nastiness while motivating employees below them?
  - sliverstorm 11y ago
    You could ask the same questions about abusive intimate relationships. Cribbing from that "book"- Destroy their sense of self-confidence & self-worth. Pick 'em young- they are easier to fool. Give them brief moments of sunshine to make them hope it'll get better. Promises. Threats. General megalomania.
    - Rapidwire 11y ago
      What book?
      - sliverstorm 11y ago
        Like, playbook of running an abusive relationship. Figure of speech
  - freyr 11y ago
    > how do you grow your business into a multibillion-dollar company? Many people will allow themselves to be abused at work without doing anything about it. They'll commiserate with their coworkers, or vent on Glassdoor, or fantasize about leaving, but without ever following through. So some good ones leave, and the rest get ridden hard and work on weekends and stay late to make their managers happy and rich.
  - dboreham 11y ago
    Because the net employee flux is positive. You have to be a total utter asshole to lose all your employees, it turns out (like, criminally abusive or just not pay them kind of bad). Being just a moderate asshole however tends to produce more work output from the employees you do manage to retain. So on balance its a win.
- api 11y ago
  While not universally correct, this is true more often than it should be. My personal opinion is that the answer lies in the more primitive parts of the brain. Investors, acquirers, and customers are all human beings, and as human beings they all respond to primate social dominance cues. Investors fund, acquirers acquire, employees perform for, and customers buy from aggressive dominant alpha males because... well... that's what the alpha wants you to do and your brain stem is telling you to obey them. They are pushing ancient buttons that way pre-date the neocortex. Again, not universal, but there's a part two: Some investors invest in these types not because they themselves are taken in, but because they know on average others will be. Could a more quiet, reserved, polite personality -- even a more intelligent one -- have managed to sell a simple cloud-connected thermostat for $3.2 billion dollars? Maybe, but statistically probably not. This will remain true until we find a way to remove legacy code.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
brown9-2 11y ago
How are we defining success? As raising capital and being acquired?
- fivesigma 11y ago
  Success = selling hyped up "smart thermostat" for $3.2 billion
potatolicious 11y ago
Most people (regardless of actual qualification) are bad at finding jobs, and for most people job-hunting is full of anxiety, dread, and in general just a thoroughly unpleasant process. As an industry we're also pretty terrible at recruiting - people who've figured out how to network effectively and come through the side doors do pretty well, but the bulk of the industry still pursues the model of "see job ad, send resume through front door, quietly wait for call back". This adds to the frustration of job hunting. Many people also find interviews extremely stressful - our industry makes this worse by sticking them through exhausting full-day marathons full of seemingly pointless trivia. Not so long ago I was stuck in a horrible job with truly abusive managers. Everyone hated it and commiserated copiously after work (we drank a lot back then), and everyone talked about leaving. Out of the 20-odd people only 4 actually ended up leaving (including me). When I asked people about it it was nearly universally about anxiety and fear. People loathe interviewing, applying, and all that, to a point where they're willing to put up with a lot of pain just to avoid it.
- throwaway6497 11y ago
  Also, most people are supporting a mortgage + one/two kids + spouse. It is easy for a person with FU money to just quit the job on a whim, and search for a new job. A majority of software engineers are still scared of being unemployed. Imagine being without a job in Silicon valley for a few months (high mortgage/rent + kids + spouse). Your savings will deplete fast; It is kind of scary and it is the biggest reason why people put up with abuse till they find a way out.
- mpdehaan2 11y ago
  Sometimes companies can be successful in spite of their leadership, because they have people that care about the users and products working under those conditions. I just imagine how much BETTER those companies could be with more positive leadership though. It's a waste. If Nest is this way under a tyrant, imagine how it really COULD be, and how many more interesting things they could create.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
wpietri 11y ago
If you really want to know, this is the book I'd suggest you start with: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-He-That-Controlling/dp/0425191656 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-He-That-Controlling/dp/042519... It's by a guy who was a counselor for abusive men, often ones attending therapy as part of a court order. It is the single most astute book I have read. He spent more than a decade listening to people's bullshit, and in this book he breaks it down brilliantly. Particularly relevant to you are the sections on how abusive relationships benefit abusers and why the abused stay so long.
vram22 11y ago
It happens because people allow it to happen.
code777777 11y ago
I never met the man, but wasn't Steve Jobs famous for this too? I've read supposed accounts where he sounded worse than Nest's management.
PhantomGremlin 11y ago
how did someone with such an abusive management style lead his company to success? Lawrence Joseph Ellison has a reputation like that, and his company seems to have done OK. Many successful companies are founded/led by sociopaths.

Honest question: how did someone with such an abusive management style lead his company to success? I'd think that his employees would just leave and go work elsewhere.

dboreham 11y ago

Because behaving like this is moderately correlated with success. You don't have to be an asshole to succeed in business, but it can help.

asdfologist 11y ago
Yes but I'm asking how. If you piss off your employees and they leave, how do you grow your business into a multibillion-dollar company?
- w1ntermute 11y ago
  Because not that many employees actually left, despite being pissed off. There was no way the Valley élite would let one of their own (Tony Fadell) have a hard fall, so at least a semi-successful exit was guaranteed from the beginning. The reason why Jobs and Fadell could be assholes and still succeed is because they were/are Jobs/Fadell. That doesn't mean you or I can act like assholes and still succeed. Perhaps we could be assholes after we succeed, but that's a highly unlikely hypothetical.
  - aledalgrande 11y ago
    I agree. I've seen a*holes who were nobodies, and they went nowhere. This is because he is Tony Fadell.
  - xenadu02 11y ago
    I'd also point out that Jobs was know to have become less of an asshole by the time he returned to Apple. Some people think it was reconnecting to his family that helped but who knows. You can demand greatness without being an asshole. You can tell someone the work they did isn't good enough without being an asshole. You can also truthfully review someone's bad code without being an asshole, for what it's worth. Being an asshole != "telling it like it is" though most people confuse the two.
    - potatolicious 11y ago
      > "Being an asshole != "telling it like it is" though most people confuse the two." This reminds me of an old quote. "People who are brutally honest generally enjoy the brutality more than the honesty."
      - bobby_9x 11y ago
        I've also seen honesty being confused with being an 'asshole'. You tell someone something they don't want to hear, but need to hear, and you are now known as an asshole.
        st3v3r 11y ago
        Not usually. People who do that think they're saying something that someone needs to hear, but they're usually either wrong, or saying it in a manner that does make them an asshole.
        bobby_9x 11y ago
        I disagree. Most people don’t want to hear the truth and will take anything they don’t want to hear as a personal attack against them. I’ve seen it time and time again.. and then pushed out on social media to make the person that said it look like the bad guy...and since it’s usually one person against another, it’s impossible to defend. This is why when the technology gets cheap enough, I will have a secret body cam on me at all times. It’s already been proven many times that privacy no longer matters. Hell, a guy got an entire basketball team taken away from him based on private conversations.
        dogecoinbase 11y ago
        This is why when the technology gets cheap enough, I will have a secret body cam on me at all times. "...you are now known as an asshole."
        st3v3r 11y ago
- bschilke 11y ago
  Could it be that the people that report to a Fadell/Jobs are very talented and are able to absorb the nastiness while motivating employees below them?
- sliverstorm 11y ago
  You could ask the same questions about abusive intimate relationships. Cribbing from that "book"- Destroy their sense of self-confidence & self-worth. Pick 'em young- they are easier to fool. Give them brief moments of sunshine to make them hope it'll get better. Promises. Threats. General megalomania.
  - Rapidwire 11y ago
    What book?
    - sliverstorm 11y ago
      Like, playbook of running an abusive relationship. Figure of speech
- freyr 11y ago
  > how do you grow your business into a multibillion-dollar company? Many people will allow themselves to be abused at work without doing anything about it. They'll commiserate with their coworkers, or vent on Glassdoor, or fantasize about leaving, but without ever following through. So some good ones leave, and the rest get ridden hard and work on weekends and stay late to make their managers happy and rich.
- dboreham 11y ago
  Because the net employee flux is positive. You have to be a total utter asshole to lose all your employees, it turns out (like, criminally abusive or just not pay them kind of bad). Being just a moderate asshole however tends to produce more work output from the employees you do manage to retain. So on balance its a win.
api 11y ago
While not universally correct, this is true more often than it should be. My personal opinion is that the answer lies in the more primitive parts of the brain. Investors, acquirers, and customers are all human beings, and as human beings they all respond to primate social dominance cues. Investors fund, acquirers acquire, employees perform for, and customers buy from aggressive dominant alpha males because... well... that's what the alpha wants you to do and your brain stem is telling you to obey them. They are pushing ancient buttons that way pre-date the neocortex. Again, not universal, but there's a part two: Some investors invest in these types not because they themselves are taken in, but because they know on average others will be. Could a more quiet, reserved, polite personality -- even a more intelligent one -- have managed to sell a simple cloud-connected thermostat for $3.2 billion dollars? Maybe, but statistically probably not. This will remain true until we find a way to remove legacy code.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

brown9-2 11y ago

How are we defining success? As raising capital and being acquired?

fivesigma 11y ago
Success = selling hyped up "smart thermostat" for $3.2 billion

potatolicious 11y ago

Most people (regardless of actual qualification) are bad at finding jobs, and for most people job-hunting is full of anxiety, dread, and in general just a thoroughly unpleasant process. As an industry we're also pretty terrible at recruiting - people who've figured out how to network effectively and come through the side doors do pretty well, but the bulk of the industry still pursues the model of "see job ad, send resume through front door, quietly wait for call back". This adds to the frustration of job hunting. Many people also find interviews extremely stressful - our industry makes this worse by sticking them through exhausting full-day marathons full of seemingly pointless trivia. Not so long ago I was stuck in a horrible job with truly abusive managers. Everyone hated it and commiserated copiously after work (we drank a lot back then), and everyone talked about leaving. Out of the 20-odd people only 4 actually ended up leaving (including me). When I asked people about it it was nearly universally about anxiety and fear. People loathe interviewing, applying, and all that, to a point where they're willing to put up with a lot of pain just to avoid it.

throwaway6497 11y ago
Also, most people are supporting a mortgage + one/two kids + spouse. It is easy for a person with FU money to just quit the job on a whim, and search for a new job. A majority of software engineers are still scared of being unemployed. Imagine being without a job in Silicon valley for a few months (high mortgage/rent + kids + spouse). Your savings will deplete fast; It is kind of scary and it is the biggest reason why people put up with abuse till they find a way out.
mpdehaan2 11y ago
Sometimes companies can be successful in spite of their leadership, because they have people that care about the users and products working under those conditions. I just imagine how much BETTER those companies could be with more positive leadership though. It's a waste. If Nest is this way under a tyrant, imagine how it really COULD be, and how many more interesting things they could create.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

wpietri 11y ago

If you really want to know, this is the book I'd suggest you start with: http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-He-That-Controlling/dp/0425191656 http://www.amazon.com/Why-Does-He-That-Controlling/dp/042519... It's by a guy who was a counselor for abusive men, often ones attending therapy as part of a court order. It is the single most astute book I have read. He spent more than a decade listening to people's bullshit, and in this book he breaks it down brilliantly. Particularly relevant to you are the sections on how abusive relationships benefit abusers and why the abused stay so long.

vram22 11y ago

It happens because people allow it to happen.

code777777 11y ago

I never met the man, but wasn't Steve Jobs famous for this too? I've read supposed accounts where he sounded worse than Nest's management.

PhantomGremlin 11y ago

how did someone with such an abusive management style lead his company to success? Lawrence Joseph Ellison has a reputation like that, and his company seems to have done OK. Many successful companies are founded/led by sociopaths.