5 ms·
I know two startups started both in 2020. They started out with roughly on the same idea, having raised similar funding. Startup #1 decided to do full-remote f
by gregdoesit 4y ago
I know two startups started both in 2020. They started out with roughly on the same idea, having raised similar funding.
Startup #1 decided to do full-remote from day one. After a year, the founder of the full-remote startup had little progress: they ended up figuring out how to work, had to fire people "not cut out" for remote work, and then realized they really make meaningful progress after week-long retreats as a team which they now do on an adhoc basis.
Startup #2 stayed in-office even during the pandemic in the same location - following local guidelines on COVID rules as with all businesses. They did this because this was the way the founders knew how to work, and they knew that full-remote would be a steep learning curve and slow down their iteration speed as they are rushing to find product-market-fit. They only hired for onsite 2-3 days a week, and paid very well in return.
Startup #2 found PMF in year 1, and now are at ~30 people, ~100 paying businesses, growing strong, ready for their Series A. They have engineering, product, sales and customer support in the same office. As this startup grows, they are putting remote-friendly policies in place as they realize they'll have a hard time hiring and retaining without. But their core culture is collaborating frequently as in-person.
Startup #1 is looking for PMF and are still learning how to work efficiently as a full-remote team. In this sense, they are well ahead of Startup #2. In product progress, they are behind. For runway, they are about the same, as Startup #1 runs with a smaller team than #2.
In my social media feed, almost everyone advocates for full-remote work, as from a personal point of view this is the preference of most people. No commute, more flexible work hours and choosing where to live and where to work from are all undoubtedly huge benefits for any individual.
Still, my observation is that working full-remote or full-distributed has a learning path that takes time and effort. There are people, managers and teams are not there just yet. And we might learn that certain team phases, team dynamics and business environments are better fitted for full-remote or fully distributed versus one that has more "in-office" contact.
- lowbloodsugar 4y agoIf we've learned anything from reading HN, a sample of two isn't statistically significant, especially when talking about startups. I've known people in several startups and very few cashed out - and they were all in office. It's interesting that you state that Startup #2 paid very well in return for coming into the office. I get paid very well for doing my job, regardless of whether it is remote or in office. If Startup #1 has decided that remote means they don't need to pay very well, then that is probably your root cause.
- lozenge 4y agoHow many COVID infections were caused by startup 2 breaking the law?
- barry-cotter 4y ago> Startup #2 stayed in-office even during the pandemic in the same location - following local guidelines on COVID rules as with all businesses.
- xtracto 4y agoHa! This happened in the startup where I worked in 2020: CEO was stubborn to work in the office so he implemented "all official guidelines " to keep some people in the office. There were 2 COVID outbreaks in the 10 months I worked there during the pandemic (I refused to go to the office). I later found a better paying fully remote job with sensible leadership .
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- quickthrower2 4y agoMy takeaway from that is very early startups should be in person, but beyond that very early stage remote will make sense especially as devs can be picky and want to work remote.
- strikelaserclaw 4y agoYes, In Person is always better where there is more "chaos", but for established companies where most people have "tasks" to do, remote works just fine.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- koide 4y agoAnd mine is that you can't tell much from that anecdote. The failing startup might be failing for any number of reasons. There are counterpoints of fully remote startups that have worked out well. So basically, it's just noise. There isn't even an attempt made at explaining why is working remotely the problem, they might not be suited to it, or that they tried before being ready for it as OP stated.