3 ms·
You never know who the unicorn employees are until it's too late - they're working for someone else and either don't want to leave or know what their market val
by dilemma 10y ago
You never know who the unicorn employees are until it's too late - they're working for someone else and either don't want to leave or know what their market value is so they are no longer a "deal" to hire.
If you want to find talent, you must find a way to develop it in-house.
- mathattack 10y agoIf you want to find talent, you must find a way to develop it in-house. This is a great sentiment, but doesn't scale at hypergrowth. P&G and McKinsey can do this, because they're growing slowly. If you're growing at 100+% a year (or even 50+%) you just don't have time to grow all your own talent. It's a very challenging problem. Great leaders rely on bringing people in that they've worked with before, but there's limits to how much this can scale. Overall the OP is spot on for what he says.
- sathackr 10y agoDid you read the article? It's about employees of "Unicorn" companies, not "Unicorn" employees.
- Kinnard 10y agoI'd love to see information on the latter.
- eschutte2 10y agoI much preferred the brief moment in time when "unicorn" was used to mean "someone who does both code and design really well," because it made sense: something rumored to exist but nobody's seen it, hard to capture, has magical powers to make things better. The only thing VC companies and unicorns have in common are: fairy tale, extinction? Is it really just "something rare?" Not a very deep metaphor.
- Kinnard 10y agoHmmm, I've developed both skills in tandem . . . maybe I should start calling myself a unicorn . . .
- dilemma 10y agoI opened the link and was about to get started reading but came up with an idea for what I wanted to say based on how I interpreted the headline and went back and wrote the above. So you're right, I didn't read it but I will now.