3 ms·

Around 50-60 people. Excellent team, wasn't crazy about the founders. Whatever the stated goals of the company were, the only ones that mattered day-to-day were

Around 50-60 people. Excellent team, wasn't crazy about the founders. Whatever the stated goals of the company were, the only ones that mattered day-to-day were getting to (and maximizing) the next investment round. Eventually left due to frustration with the above: I didn't join for the stock options, I joined to make a good product, and it seemed like every decision leadership made hurt the product in the long run in order to chase short term KPI gains. That strategy ultimately backfired, wouldn't you know it.

mtnGoat 5y ago
This kpi driven decision making persists across VC funded start ups everywhere. Gotta keep those investors happy so they pony up for the next round. Whatever kpi you sold them on, is all that matters now.
- version_five 5y ago
  I've only worked at one startup (not yc); this was my experience too. We did lots of things that felt illogical (mainly related to what was prioritized) that I understood to be based on showing investors what they would want to see. I'm not in a position to judge whether this was s good strategy (it wasn't for us). Personally, I'm not a fan of doing stuff just because it's what I think other people want to see, and if I was going to do that, I'd see no reason in having a startup. But no doubt there are big success stories of higher valuations by focusing on subscription only SaaS over other revenue, for example, and that may be the best way to go.
- long_time_gone 5y ago
  I think it persists across all companies. They need a way to measure performance across their workforce, so they create KPIs or OKRs or whatever.
- awillen 5y ago
  Yeah, this is just the VC-backed model, not specific to YC. The reality is that for startups that choose to go this route, if you can't raise then you're dead. Happened to the last company I worked at. It's not great (though the flipside is that if you do succeed, you're able to scale quickly), but tough to judge the founders for optimizing for the thing they need to keep the lights on.

mtnGoat 5y ago

This kpi driven decision making persists across VC funded start ups everywhere. Gotta keep those investors happy so they pony up for the next round. Whatever kpi you sold them on, is all that matters now.

version_five 5y ago
I've only worked at one startup (not yc); this was my experience too. We did lots of things that felt illogical (mainly related to what was prioritized) that I understood to be based on showing investors what they would want to see. I'm not in a position to judge whether this was s good strategy (it wasn't for us). Personally, I'm not a fan of doing stuff just because it's what I think other people want to see, and if I was going to do that, I'd see no reason in having a startup. But no doubt there are big success stories of higher valuations by focusing on subscription only SaaS over other revenue, for example, and that may be the best way to go.
long_time_gone 5y ago
I think it persists across all companies. They need a way to measure performance across their workforce, so they create KPIs or OKRs or whatever.
awillen 5y ago
Yeah, this is just the VC-backed model, not specific to YC. The reality is that for startups that choose to go this route, if you can't raise then you're dead. Happened to the last company I worked at. It's not great (though the flipside is that if you do succeed, you're able to scale quickly), but tough to judge the founders for optimizing for the thing they need to keep the lights on.