The post seems to have two separate topics - one I agree with, one I don't. One is about keeping things simple and having focus. Could not agree with it more.

The post seems to have two separate topics - one I agree with, one I don't. One is about keeping things simple and having focus. Could not agree with it more. On every proposal, ask, "What problem does this solve?", "Is the cure worse than the disease?", "If this is added, what else can be removed so that the overall weight stays the same?". All good points; I don't think that is controversial. But then, the post goes into what I can only describe as a rant. Something about going to the whiteboard. About desperation. Some random tangent on bottle deposits. I don't agree with this. A "small company" is not synonymous with a "poorly-run company". Sure, Mario Andretti's quote "If everything seems under control, you're not going fast enough" applies to almost every startup. There always will be some portion of the company that needs urgent attention. But valorizing constant struggles, throwing your hands up saying "Duh, startup" is poor leadership, IME. The big tell for me is that Ravi does not explain what is a good process. There never is a "no process" world. The choice is between a stated, well-understood process OR a poorly-specified, poorly-understood, inefficient process. A few years ago, startups used to say, "Oh, we have a flat organization - no hierarchies," and wear that as a bad of honor. Not really; there always is a hierarchy - except now it is based on who hangs out with who. I notice that most startup leaders understand this now, and the "no hierarchy" line is not trotted out these days. The "no process" bit is also like that, IMO.