4 ms·

There are plenty of successful companies where telling the CEO "no" doesn't really happen.

by CardenB 10y ago

entee 10y ago
Maybe so, but how many of them stay that way? How many of them are startups? How many become less successful because of it? My guess is that this is especially dangerous for startups. Think about it, you're a founder and you've been told "No" by investors, experts, customers, thousands of times. Now all of a sudden you've proved them all wrong, you've built a business and it's starting to show promise. But to scale, you're going to need some of those experts who told you "No". If you're building a car, you're gonna need to hire some people that have run a car factory or managed a complex supply chain. You're gonna need to trust them when they tell you, "I need 6 months, 3 months isn't doable". Or not. Maybe you're right, you can push beyond the possible. Maybe you're wrong and you can't, breaking your team and product in the process. Which one is right? You choose. But don't screw up, it's all on the line. I think this is one of the least appreciated traits of the giants. Musk, Jobs, they pushed their people to the breaking point, but clearly they also knew what to drop and what to insist on to get things out the door. Quoting Jobs, "Real artists ship." Jobs famously argued against an app store, then was convinced and then pushed on it as hard as anyone. I could go on, but the point is this kind of decision is fiendishly hard, and I think it separates the great from the mediocre.
jasondebo 10y ago
Regardless of whether it's a successful company or not, is that a fun work environment? These are great questions to tease out what level of autonomy to expect also IMO. For me autonomy and happiness are synonymous.
freddyc 10y ago
I think it depends on how it's handled. If the CEO fosters an open environment where employees can put forward contrarian views but everyone respects that the final decision ultimately rests with her (including saying "no") then in my experience the company will be one with high morale which in turn generates success. The alternative is a CEO who views objections as disrespectful and gets rid of any "disruptive" people. I've experienced both scenarios, and the second is never anything but a disaster that leads to high turnover and the best employees leaving for roles where they are actually valued.
paulcole 10y ago
I think the point is the OP wouldn't want to work at any of them.

There are plenty of successful companies where telling the CEO "no" doesn't really happen.

by CardenB 10y ago

There are plenty of successful companies where telling the CEO "no" doesn't really happen.

entee 10y ago

Maybe so, but how many of them stay that way? How many of them are startups? How many become less successful because of it? My guess is that this is especially dangerous for startups. Think about it, you're a founder and you've been told "No" by investors, experts, customers, thousands of times. Now all of a sudden you've proved them all wrong, you've built a business and it's starting to show promise. But to scale, you're going to need some of those experts who told you "No". If you're building a car, you're gonna need to hire some people that have run a car factory or managed a complex supply chain. You're gonna need to trust them when they tell you, "I need 6 months, 3 months isn't doable". Or not. Maybe you're right, you can push beyond the possible. Maybe you're wrong and you can't, breaking your team and product in the process. Which one is right? You choose. But don't screw up, it's all on the line. I think this is one of the least appreciated traits of the giants. Musk, Jobs, they pushed their people to the breaking point, but clearly they also knew what to drop and what to insist on to get things out the door. Quoting Jobs, "Real artists ship." Jobs famously argued against an app store, then was convinced and then pushed on it as hard as anyone. I could go on, but the point is this kind of decision is fiendishly hard, and I think it separates the great from the mediocre.

jasondebo 10y ago

Regardless of whether it's a successful company or not, is that a fun work environment? These are great questions to tease out what level of autonomy to expect also IMO. For me autonomy and happiness are synonymous.

freddyc 10y ago

I think it depends on how it's handled. If the CEO fosters an open environment where employees can put forward contrarian views but everyone respects that the final decision ultimately rests with her (including saying "no") then in my experience the company will be one with high morale which in turn generates success. The alternative is a CEO who views objections as disrespectful and gets rid of any "disruptive" people. I've experienced both scenarios, and the second is never anything but a disaster that leads to high turnover and the best employees leaving for roles where they are actually valued.

paulcole 10y ago

I think the point is the OP wouldn't want to work at any of them.