7 ms·

I hate this BS about A managers hire A people, B people hire C etc. This is total MBA thinking (I think it comes form GE, or at least they espoused it) on a fo

I hate this BS about A managers hire A people, B people hire C etc. This is total MBA thinking (I think it comes form GE, or at least they espoused it) on a forum where people routinely mock MBAs. I have been lucky to work in a field where teams frequently work in parallel and success or failure is pretty clear cut. And teams are often stratified based on the priority of project. Many times-- not always -- the "B" team crushes the "A" team. Why? Some reasons include: the A team is performative and focused on the things that burnish the careers and reputation of its members. B teams have more of a sense of the wolf being at the door and that if they don't perform their task they will feel the consequence. Being underdogs promotes teamwork. Obviously people have profound differences in their strengths and weaknesses and some people are completely inappropriate. But calling people stars or A player covers up a lot of lazy thinking that includes a lot of bias. I have worked at smaller startups that say "we only hire A players". Obviously that is delusional but worse it covered up the more profound questions. Why did you hire the wrong person? Why did that person or team fail?

Swizec 4y ago
An A player from Google will fail at a 10 person startup. An A player from a 10 person startup will choke on FAANG bureaucracy and fail. Fit matters. You wouldn't hire Jim Carey for a DiCaprio role.
- mooreds 4y ago
  This is an underappreciated truth. The corollary is: find out where you thrive and go there. Don't beat yourself up if you get spun out of a FAANG, or a startup or a smallco or a bootstrap or a founding role or a mid-tier enterprise. Don't contort to a role or company that isn't a fit. If you have solid skills, you can find a place.
- albertgoeswoof 4y ago
  You obviously haven’t seen eternal sunshine of the spotless mind
  - Swizec 4y ago
    I have. Pretty sure I've seen every movie he was in, huge fan. He's a great actor, but he hasn't shown the range that other A-listers have. Whether that's because of skill, interest, or typecasting, I couldn't say.
    - rockostrich 4y ago
      Kind of dumb to say an actor that's clearly proven he has immense range when there are so many other obvious choices. Vin Diesel for example is an A-list star who clearly does not have anywhere the range that Carrey or DiCaprio have.
  - lencastre 4y ago
    Bestest movie together with Lost in Translation
    - googlryas 4y ago
      Can I guess you're between 37 and 42 years old.
- pryelluw 4y ago
  Jim Carey as the protagonist of titanic does sound like a great movie. I’m sure he would have found space on that piece of wood and survived.
  - kingforaday 4y ago
    I saw this over the holiday period last month. James Cameron commissioned a study because he got sick of people yelling at him for killing Jack. https://www.insider.com/james-cameron-had-forensic-analysis-done-on-titanic-door-scene-2022-12 https://www.insider.com/james-cameron-had-forensic-analysis-...
    - neilv 4y ago
      > "We took two stunt people who were the same body mass of Kate and Leo and we put sensors all over them and inside them and we put them in ice water and we tested to see whether they could have survived through a variety of methods and the answer was, there was no way they both could have survived. Only one could survive," he said. This is peak underappreciated stuntpeople.
- rockostrich 4y ago
  Speaking in absolutes is never useful even though I think this advice might apply when looking for a new role, but small companies tend to grow if you help them succeed so it would be difficult to say your fit is at 10 person companies when that means you would have to jump ship every year just to stay in your comfort zone. I joined my current company when it was 40 people (and around 10 developers). Almost 6 years later we're ~1500 and the engineering org is something like 200-300. I think I was most comfortable around 20 or so developers but that doesn't mean I can't make continue to have meaningful impact now that there's an order of magnitude more people and the org has completely changed. I've seen folks who were supposedly "A player"s from small start-ups and FAANG join the company at different stages. Some succeed and some fail but I never noticed any correlation between current size of the company they're currently thriving at and our size when they joined. Fit is never going to be perfect so don't give up on something just because it might be a little uncomfortable. Give up if you've tried to make it work and it's clear you can't find a way to have impact.
  - eldritch_4ier 4y ago
    "Speaking in absolutes is never useful" is a great paradox
toss1 4y ago
Yup, this is the one thing that struck me wrong in the essay. After spending multiple paragraphs about how they found that they had to dig much deeper into the background of every exec, getting 10+ references from reports, peers, and their managers, and developing specific lists of red flags . . .they end the section with: "Takeaway: Always trust your gut on people. " Yes, for sure, if you 'gut' tells you something is off about someone, seriously consider and trust that also, but what was really effective was not gut-trusting, but gathering more hard data and observations to evaluate. Just seems like the author didn't really think it through.
- naijaboiler 4y ago
  I have hired before. A few times. "Trust my gut" is still the best predictor of success for me. Every hire i have talked myself into didn't end up working out. Nowadays for hiring, i live by, "if it's not a strong yes, it's not a yes"
  - toss1 4y ago
    Agree that a 'gut feeling' that something is off is not to be ignored; it's likely just factors unconsciously processed. That said, how much of your 'Strong Yes' assessments are on your gut and how much on you have enough info to see that this candidate is qualified, enthusiastic, and a good fit? Also, how many times have those failed to work out and how many have 'Weak Yes' candidates actually worked out in the end? Those counter-examples might be worth looking into...
- methyl 4y ago
  I think it’s trusting your gut when it says „no”, not that you can trust only your gut when it comes to hiring. Wasn’t clear but that’s how I understand it and agree.
  - toss1 4y ago
    Indeed likely! But in an article for publication it seems best to say something like "Trust your gut when it says "No", and get lots of data when you don't have strong gut feelings", rather than just that general trope...
gumby 4y ago
> A managers hire A people, B people hire C etc If that is the case, how do the B people get jobs in the first place? Who hires them?
- Nevermark 4y ago
  The same reason A engineers can put out B work: resource/time/reward tradeoffs and the inevitable unknowns.
- nikanj 4y ago
  Nepotism
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- satvikpendem 4y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34357689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34357689
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
mbesto 4y ago
> Many times-- not always -- the "B" team crushes the "A" team. Being underdogs promotes teamwork. It's clear you don't understand what A and B people are then. If the "B team" is crushing the "A Team", then they aren't the "B team". Also, notice how you switched "player" with "team"? The quote is "A players hire A players", not "team". The point is that top tier individuals typically hire top tier individuals. The reason this notion isn't so clear cut is because its hard to identify A players before the fact. It's a retrospective truthism.
- endisneigh 4y ago
  Seems like a no true Scotsman
  - mbesto 4y ago
    Huh? I'm not excluding any portion of the cohort I'm speaking of. You're either an A player or you're not.
vasco 4y ago
In general good people will be able to identify good people (colloquially: game recognizes game). And good people will know they are being interviewed by someone who is not so good, and they won't want to join. A hires A. Additionally, people who are not so good tend to be threatened by good people. So they will rather hire someone that won't threaten or "find them out". B hires C.

Swizec 4y ago

An A player from Google will fail at a 10 person startup. An A player from a 10 person startup will choke on FAANG bureaucracy and fail. Fit matters. You wouldn't hire Jim Carey for a DiCaprio role.

mooreds 4y ago
This is an underappreciated truth. The corollary is: find out where you thrive and go there. Don't beat yourself up if you get spun out of a FAANG, or a startup or a smallco or a bootstrap or a founding role or a mid-tier enterprise. Don't contort to a role or company that isn't a fit. If you have solid skills, you can find a place.
albertgoeswoof 4y ago
You obviously haven’t seen eternal sunshine of the spotless mind
- Swizec 4y ago
  I have. Pretty sure I've seen every movie he was in, huge fan. He's a great actor, but he hasn't shown the range that other A-listers have. Whether that's because of skill, interest, or typecasting, I couldn't say.
  - rockostrich 4y ago
    Kind of dumb to say an actor that's clearly proven he has immense range when there are so many other obvious choices. Vin Diesel for example is an A-list star who clearly does not have anywhere the range that Carrey or DiCaprio have.
- lencastre 4y ago
  Bestest movie together with Lost in Translation
  - googlryas 4y ago
    Can I guess you're between 37 and 42 years old.
pryelluw 4y ago
Jim Carey as the protagonist of titanic does sound like a great movie. I’m sure he would have found space on that piece of wood and survived.
- kingforaday 4y ago
  I saw this over the holiday period last month. James Cameron commissioned a study because he got sick of people yelling at him for killing Jack. https://www.insider.com/james-cameron-had-forensic-analysis-done-on-titanic-door-scene-2022-12 https://www.insider.com/james-cameron-had-forensic-analysis-...
  - neilv 4y ago
    > "We took two stunt people who were the same body mass of Kate and Leo and we put sensors all over them and inside them and we put them in ice water and we tested to see whether they could have survived through a variety of methods and the answer was, there was no way they both could have survived. Only one could survive," he said. This is peak underappreciated stuntpeople.
rockostrich 4y ago
Speaking in absolutes is never useful even though I think this advice might apply when looking for a new role, but small companies tend to grow if you help them succeed so it would be difficult to say your fit is at 10 person companies when that means you would have to jump ship every year just to stay in your comfort zone. I joined my current company when it was 40 people (and around 10 developers). Almost 6 years later we're ~1500 and the engineering org is something like 200-300. I think I was most comfortable around 20 or so developers but that doesn't mean I can't make continue to have meaningful impact now that there's an order of magnitude more people and the org has completely changed. I've seen folks who were supposedly "A player"s from small start-ups and FAANG join the company at different stages. Some succeed and some fail but I never noticed any correlation between current size of the company they're currently thriving at and our size when they joined. Fit is never going to be perfect so don't give up on something just because it might be a little uncomfortable. Give up if you've tried to make it work and it's clear you can't find a way to have impact.
- eldritch_4ier 4y ago
  "Speaking in absolutes is never useful" is a great paradox

toss1 4y ago

Yup, this is the one thing that struck me wrong in the essay. After spending multiple paragraphs about how they found that they had to dig much deeper into the background of every exec, getting 10+ references from reports, peers, and their managers, and developing specific lists of red flags . . .they end the section with: "Takeaway: Always trust your gut on people. " Yes, for sure, if you 'gut' tells you something is off about someone, seriously consider and trust that also, but what was really effective was not gut-trusting, but gathering more hard data and observations to evaluate. Just seems like the author didn't really think it through.

naijaboiler 4y ago
I have hired before. A few times. "Trust my gut" is still the best predictor of success for me. Every hire i have talked myself into didn't end up working out. Nowadays for hiring, i live by, "if it's not a strong yes, it's not a yes"
- toss1 4y ago
  Agree that a 'gut feeling' that something is off is not to be ignored; it's likely just factors unconsciously processed. That said, how much of your 'Strong Yes' assessments are on your gut and how much on you have enough info to see that this candidate is qualified, enthusiastic, and a good fit? Also, how many times have those failed to work out and how many have 'Weak Yes' candidates actually worked out in the end? Those counter-examples might be worth looking into...
methyl 4y ago
I think it’s trusting your gut when it says „no”, not that you can trust only your gut when it comes to hiring. Wasn’t clear but that’s how I understand it and agree.
- toss1 4y ago
  Indeed likely! But in an article for publication it seems best to say something like "Trust your gut when it says "No", and get lots of data when you don't have strong gut feelings", rather than just that general trope...

gumby 4y ago

> A managers hire A people, B people hire C etc If that is the case, how do the B people get jobs in the first place? Who hires them?

Nevermark 4y ago
The same reason A engineers can put out B work: resource/time/reward tradeoffs and the inevitable unknowns.
nikanj 4y ago
Nepotism
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
satvikpendem 4y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34357689 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34357689

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

mbesto 4y ago

> Many times-- not always -- the "B" team crushes the "A" team. Being underdogs promotes teamwork. It's clear you don't understand what A and B people are then. If the "B team" is crushing the "A Team", then they aren't the "B team". Also, notice how you switched "player" with "team"? The quote is "A players hire A players", not "team". The point is that top tier individuals typically hire top tier individuals. The reason this notion isn't so clear cut is because its hard to identify A players before the fact. It's a retrospective truthism.

endisneigh 4y ago
Seems like a no true Scotsman
- mbesto 4y ago
  Huh? I'm not excluding any portion of the cohort I'm speaking of. You're either an A player or you're not.

vasco 4y ago

In general good people will be able to identify good people (colloquially: game recognizes game). And good people will know they are being interviewed by someone who is not so good, and they won't want to join. A hires A. Additionally, people who are not so good tend to be threatened by good people. So they will rather hire someone that won't threaten or "find them out". B hires C.