3 ms·

I mostly agree, but I think it's important to note that the necessity of administrative overhead (and associated friction) scales with team size and project sco

I mostly agree, but I think it's important to note that the necessity of administrative overhead (and associated friction) scales with team size and project scope. I expect a lone developer to be the most productive by far in the narrow sense of producing working code. However, at some point a single person just can't do everything that needs doing themselves. So I'll agree that as things grow administrative overhead will necessarily creep in. But I expect that if you can find a way to turn a profit, a smaller team will probably involve significantly less overhead. So if (as in PG's hypothetical) the developer is worth $80k at a big company, how much would you estimate them to be worth at a company of only 4 people that has a good idea and funding?

sangnoir 6y ago
> So if (as in PG's hypothetical) the developer is worth $80k at a big company, how much would you estimate them to be worth at a company of only 4 people that has a good idea and funding? My point is that a 4-person company with a good idea and funding doesn't usually remain a 4-person company. Sure, they could be churning out good code at an amazing rate, but is transient state - in order to make money at the levels that the VC-class demands, pointy-haired bosses will be required, and they come with structure, meetings, emails, templates, and other administrata rituals. edit: I think this is proof enough that VCs don't optimize for individual productivity - nobody who likes having more money does.