3 ms·

As someone who runs a startup, Id kill for a couple of "dumb" people who can get something done. A number of years a go I worked at a startup, and we had a you

As someone who runs a startup, Id kill for a couple of "dumb" people who can get something done. A number of years a go I worked at a startup, and we had a young inexperienced employee, who didn't know very much at all. When we had meetings he would unprompted send out lists of everything we had discussed, along with links and useful information. If someone had mentioned that we needed a to rent a truck once we get to LA, to move some gear, he would look up all the places where that could be done. Simple stuff like typing stuff in to google. One of the best employees i have ever worked with. Every time he asked a question, it was a question based on all the research he had done based on the question he asked a few days ago. Its great if you already have the solution, but what i really want is people who can go out and find the solution. There are a lot of smart and lazy people out there, but if you build the future you cant rely on old information, you need to iterate on new solutions, and that requires people who can get things done. So please be smart and experienced, but unless you can get things done you are just in the way.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
BoxFour 3y ago
In this particular context, the connotation of "dumb" does not pertain to a complete lack of knowledge. Even individuals regarded as intelligent may find themselves in situations where their knowledge is limited. Rather, it pertains more to one's capacity for logical reasoning and discerning connections, which your employee seems to have demonstrated proficiently. They embody the role of the "field commander" as described in the article. Consider, instead, if the employee inundated your inbox with materials only loosely relevant to the meetings, rather than undertaking the extensive efforts described earlier. Alternatively, envision the employee hiring a moving company without consulting you, rather than researching truck rental options. The article's reference to "dumb and energetic" pertains to this type of behavior—acting impulsively and energetically without proper consideration—rather than the situation you are describing. Indeed, there are companies that would reward that type of 'bias to action' even if the results weren't helpful at all.
the_af 3y ago
The article doesn't equate "dumb" with "inexperienced". It equates dumb with "makes wrong and dangerous decisions". In this context, you probably do not want industrious people who will consistently make mistakes and create more work and a mess for others to clean up. The dumb also do not learn from their mistakes -- they are not simply inexperienced.
steve_adams_86 3y ago
> When we had meetings he would unprompted send out lists of everything we had discussed, along with links and useful information. This has been a practice of mine for a long time now. A boss of mine once told me “the guy taking notes will never have any sway in the conversation, you’re handicapping yourself”, and I said something like “the guy taking notes actually knows what’s going on, though”. He wasn’t very receptive at first, but it stuck, and he actually began to use me as a reference to know what was going on. I love talking to people and keeping tabs on what’s up. Teams tend to be awful at it, but it’s no specific person’s fault. Making a point of doing it is like a relatively inexpensive super power. You can help your coworkers a lot, and you rarely end up doing unnecessary work. That’s one of my favourite parts I think; I really can’t stand wasting my or other people’s time. I think my boss was wrong, too. When you’ve got a good grasp on what’s going on, you’re in a far better position to weigh in after initial conversations. I’d prefer to hear people out and only interject if I see obvious issues with their ideas. Otherwise I’ll just listen.
- majormajor 3y ago
  Yeah, I like to say the person who has the most impactful/efficient sway in a conversation is the one who knows what's going on well enough to not have to talk constantly, but to just drop in some important questions or corrections or other considerations at the necessary time. ;) It's much easier to talk than it is to change people's minds.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

BoxFour 3y ago

In this particular context, the connotation of "dumb" does not pertain to a complete lack of knowledge. Even individuals regarded as intelligent may find themselves in situations where their knowledge is limited. Rather, it pertains more to one's capacity for logical reasoning and discerning connections, which your employee seems to have demonstrated proficiently. They embody the role of the "field commander" as described in the article. Consider, instead, if the employee inundated your inbox with materials only loosely relevant to the meetings, rather than undertaking the extensive efforts described earlier. Alternatively, envision the employee hiring a moving company without consulting you, rather than researching truck rental options. The article's reference to "dumb and energetic" pertains to this type of behavior—acting impulsively and energetically without proper consideration—rather than the situation you are describing. Indeed, there are companies that would reward that type of 'bias to action' even if the results weren't helpful at all.

the_af 3y ago

The article doesn't equate "dumb" with "inexperienced". It equates dumb with "makes wrong and dangerous decisions". In this context, you probably do not want industrious people who will consistently make mistakes and create more work and a mess for others to clean up. The dumb also do not learn from their mistakes -- they are not simply inexperienced.

steve_adams_86 3y ago

> When we had meetings he would unprompted send out lists of everything we had discussed, along with links and useful information. This has been a practice of mine for a long time now. A boss of mine once told me “the guy taking notes will never have any sway in the conversation, you’re handicapping yourself”, and I said something like “the guy taking notes actually knows what’s going on, though”. He wasn’t very receptive at first, but it stuck, and he actually began to use me as a reference to know what was going on. I love talking to people and keeping tabs on what’s up. Teams tend to be awful at it, but it’s no specific person’s fault. Making a point of doing it is like a relatively inexpensive super power. You can help your coworkers a lot, and you rarely end up doing unnecessary work. That’s one of my favourite parts I think; I really can’t stand wasting my or other people’s time. I think my boss was wrong, too. When you’ve got a good grasp on what’s going on, you’re in a far better position to weigh in after initial conversations. I’d prefer to hear people out and only interject if I see obvious issues with their ideas. Otherwise I’ll just listen.

majormajor 3y ago
Yeah, I like to say the person who has the most impactful/efficient sway in a conversation is the one who knows what's going on well enough to not have to talk constantly, but to just drop in some important questions or corrections or other considerations at the necessary time. ;) It's much easier to talk than it is to change people's minds.