4 ms·

I think the reason for that is more one of risk. Starting a new company is a lot more risky than being an employee of one. And if you have a family to support,

by dhh 18y ago

I think the reason for that is more one of risk. Starting a new company is a lot more risky than being an employee of one. And if you have a family to support, you're less likely to be willing to take on big risk. So I absolutely agree that it's easier to start a company when you're single and have no obligations because you can tolerate much more risk. Update: Seems that the original argument changed from "if kids are so great, why aren't more founders parents when they start their business" to "kids might make you more productive during regular working hours, but you need more than just regular working hours to start a business". I'm happy to offer my thoughts on the second argument as well. I think people working on startups generally work way too much and the ones that succeed don't do so because they put in 14-hour days. At 37signals, our "startup" (Basecamp) got off the ground on a 10 hour/week programming budget and designers who were busy doing client projects. For the first year, it wasn't the sole focus for the company. We believe those constraints were instrumental in their way they shaped Basecamp and thus part of the success of the company. Doesn't mean that there might not be other businesses out there where working lots and lots of hours can be beneficial somehow, but I think that it's a fallacy that you need to work crazy hours to succeed. I do believe that others believe this, though, I just don't think it's healthy or beneficial. All of this is somewhat tangential to the original argument, though, which is that you shouldn't be afraid of hiring family people. Who should start a company is a great debate as well, though.

pg 18y ago
(If this exchange is confusing to anyone, it's because dhh was replying to my comment while I was still editing it.) But in reply to the second half: while 37Signals may be a counterexample to the rule that startup founders need to work long hours to succeed, there seem to be a lot more startups that did than didn't. Different people presumably have different points at which spending more time on something makes the result come out worse. Probably this also varies with the type of work. So it could be that when person = dhh and work = product design, 10 hours per week is a reasonable limit, and when it's someone else and the work = writing database software, the limit might be 70 hours per week. In the absence of any other evidence, you have to assume that successful startup founders knew what they were doing, and that if they worked long hours it was because it paid off for them.
- dhh 18y ago
  I fully agree that different businesses require different levels of input to make it work. But this crowd seems to be mostly in the "web business" area, so I think our example is at the very least relevant. And we're saying here's an example of a web startup that didn't follow the traditional wisdom of "long hours necessary for business success", which is offered as one data point that perhaps "long hours" isn't the success requirement as some might think it is. Similar to the talk from SUS on Gmail's invitation system. Just because Gmail used an invitation system and had success doesn't mean that using an invitation system will give you success. (BTW, as meta comment, I'm incredibly impressed with the level of discussion here. It's so un-web like ;). Where are all the personal insults, the trolling, and all that which we've otherwise come to accept must be part of a open-for-all comment box. Very nice job!)
  - baltoo 18y ago
    (As a new member of this forum I'm a bit shy to add to this thread, but here it goes anyway.) I suppose you've both seen the writings of Alan Carter (http://the-programmers-stone.com/about/ http://the-programmers-stone.com/about/) and it seems to me that it just might be a way of getting these two seemingly differing viewpoints aligned. If stress is the biggest factor then age or marital status might have very little to do with it. At least directly. Married people might have learned to handle stress well and younger people might be less affected by it. That is to say, you both might have seen the "less stress affected" crowd and drawn conclusions about it.
menloparkbum 18y ago
It is actually less risky to start a "startup" than it is to bootstrap your own business. If you are a parent, you're better off trying to grow your business with someone else's money than you are with your kids' college fund.

by dhh 18y ago

pg 18y ago

(If this exchange is confusing to anyone, it's because dhh was replying to my comment while I was still editing it.) But in reply to the second half: while 37Signals may be a counterexample to the rule that startup founders need to work long hours to succeed, there seem to be a lot more startups that did than didn't. Different people presumably have different points at which spending more time on something makes the result come out worse. Probably this also varies with the type of work. So it could be that when person = dhh and work = product design, 10 hours per week is a reasonable limit, and when it's someone else and the work = writing database software, the limit might be 70 hours per week. In the absence of any other evidence, you have to assume that successful startup founders knew what they were doing, and that if they worked long hours it was because it paid off for them.

dhh 18y ago
I fully agree that different businesses require different levels of input to make it work. But this crowd seems to be mostly in the "web business" area, so I think our example is at the very least relevant. And we're saying here's an example of a web startup that didn't follow the traditional wisdom of "long hours necessary for business success", which is offered as one data point that perhaps "long hours" isn't the success requirement as some might think it is. Similar to the talk from SUS on Gmail's invitation system. Just because Gmail used an invitation system and had success doesn't mean that using an invitation system will give you success. (BTW, as meta comment, I'm incredibly impressed with the level of discussion here. It's so un-web like ;). Where are all the personal insults, the trolling, and all that which we've otherwise come to accept must be part of a open-for-all comment box. Very nice job!)
- baltoo 18y ago
  (As a new member of this forum I'm a bit shy to add to this thread, but here it goes anyway.) I suppose you've both seen the writings of Alan Carter (http://the-programmers-stone.com/about/ http://the-programmers-stone.com/about/) and it seems to me that it just might be a way of getting these two seemingly differing viewpoints aligned. If stress is the biggest factor then age or marital status might have very little to do with it. At least directly. Married people might have learned to handle stress well and younger people might be less affected by it. That is to say, you both might have seen the "less stress affected" crowd and drawn conclusions about it.

menloparkbum 18y ago

It is actually less risky to start a "startup" than it is to bootstrap your own business. If you are a parent, you're better off trying to grow your business with someone else's money than you are with your kids' college fund.