3 ms·

To me this just illustrates the excess some companies have. Frankly I wonder what some of these companies are doing to even require these staffing numbers do VC

To me this just illustrates the excess some companies have. Frankly I wonder what some of these companies are doing to even require these staffing numbers do VCs like headcount or something?

cosmodisk 6y ago
Remember interviewing a guy who worked for Uber( non technical side of things). If that's the level of candidates they hire,I'm afraid they need 5 people just to change a lightbulb.
- WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
  The issue is that when you hire someone good and realize it took 30+ interviews you realize it will take about 6 months to fill a full office. At that point, the 'minimum requirements' will fall off a cliff.
  - toast0 6y ago
    If you're having trouble filling your office with qualified people, get a smaller office. Hiring people below your requirements to be done with hiring often results in less productivity than simply not hiring.
    - snovv_crash 6y ago
      Absolutely. Many people provide negative productivity.
    - TeMPOraL 6y ago
      I think this is an underappreciated aspect of rapid growth. Hiring competent people retards growth. If you grow organically, you can afford to spend the time hiring and keeping competent people. If you need to field 200-people office next month, you'll have to drop the bar.
    - WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
      > get a smaller office. Unfortunately not compatible with American excess and someone giving you a nice chunk of cash to "invest". If you don't buy a new fancy office and fill it with 30% people who do work and 70% of people who make it harder to get work done, you're "not doing startups right". Yeah, I'm bitter.
WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
> to even require these staffing numbers do VCs like headcount or something Bullshit Jobs is a book.
klmadfejno 6y ago
Assume that like most things, there's decreasing marginal return in terms of growth for each individual employee. If your goal is grow as much as possible to pump the VC valuation, it makes sense to hire more people to get stuff done. Probably not sustainable. Probably dips into the negative frequently.
momokoko 6y ago
Yes. Headcount is a metric just like anything else and is often included in decks as an example of growth. Most of the jobs are sales people. When trying to scale fast, most VCs expect most of the money to be spent on sales people in a b2b product that has found product market fit.
- mtnGoat 6y ago
  fair enough. makes sense, in that light. Sales isn't my thing/department, I'd probably be amazed at how big the sales teams are at some of these places. Is that part of tech a kinda of a turnstile as it is?
eezurr 6y ago
I woudln't complain too much. The strength of an economy is determined more by its amperage (flow) than voltage (total dollars). Also, it redistributes wealth to the less well off; obviously, with the potential to earn a higher payout.
- naravara 6y ago
  >Also, it redistributes wealth to the less well off; obviously, with the potential to earn a higher payout. If the net effect is to outcompete small businesses with unprofitable schemes it seems like what we're actually doing is shrinking the overall pie and just redistributing the share of what's left.
Nextgrid 6y ago
Founders build better credentials (resume and reputation) if they run a bigger company. Managers build better credentials if they manage more people. Developers build better credentials (at least according to the job market) by using complex tools like Kubernetes even when the problem doesn’t justify it.

To me this just illustrates the excess some companies have. Frankly I wonder what some of these companies are doing to even require these staffing numbers do VCs like headcount or something?

cosmodisk 6y ago

Remember interviewing a guy who worked for Uber( non technical side of things). If that's the level of candidates they hire,I'm afraid they need 5 people just to change a lightbulb.

WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
The issue is that when you hire someone good and realize it took 30+ interviews you realize it will take about 6 months to fill a full office. At that point, the 'minimum requirements' will fall off a cliff.
- toast0 6y ago
  If you're having trouble filling your office with qualified people, get a smaller office. Hiring people below your requirements to be done with hiring often results in less productivity than simply not hiring.
  - snovv_crash 6y ago
    Absolutely. Many people provide negative productivity.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    I think this is an underappreciated aspect of rapid growth. Hiring competent people retards growth. If you grow organically, you can afford to spend the time hiring and keeping competent people. If you need to field 200-people office next month, you'll have to drop the bar.
  - WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago
    > get a smaller office. Unfortunately not compatible with American excess and someone giving you a nice chunk of cash to "invest". If you don't buy a new fancy office and fill it with 30% people who do work and 70% of people who make it harder to get work done, you're "not doing startups right". Yeah, I'm bitter.

WrtCdEvrydy 6y ago

> to even require these staffing numbers do VCs like headcount or something Bullshit Jobs is a book.

klmadfejno 6y ago

Assume that like most things, there's decreasing marginal return in terms of growth for each individual employee. If your goal is grow as much as possible to pump the VC valuation, it makes sense to hire more people to get stuff done. Probably not sustainable. Probably dips into the negative frequently.

momokoko 6y ago

Yes. Headcount is a metric just like anything else and is often included in decks as an example of growth. Most of the jobs are sales people. When trying to scale fast, most VCs expect most of the money to be spent on sales people in a b2b product that has found product market fit.

mtnGoat 6y ago
fair enough. makes sense, in that light. Sales isn't my thing/department, I'd probably be amazed at how big the sales teams are at some of these places. Is that part of tech a kinda of a turnstile as it is?

eezurr 6y ago

I woudln't complain too much. The strength of an economy is determined more by its amperage (flow) than voltage (total dollars). Also, it redistributes wealth to the less well off; obviously, with the potential to earn a higher payout.

naravara 6y ago
>Also, it redistributes wealth to the less well off; obviously, with the potential to earn a higher payout. If the net effect is to outcompete small businesses with unprofitable schemes it seems like what we're actually doing is shrinking the overall pie and just redistributing the share of what's left.

Nextgrid 6y ago

Founders build better credentials (resume and reputation) if they run a bigger company. Managers build better credentials if they manage more people. Developers build better credentials (at least according to the job market) by using complex tools like Kubernetes even when the problem doesn’t justify it.