5 ms·

I don't know. Just because a company doesn't move fast doesn't mean that they are a good company to work for. Calm and compassionate can just mean out of touch

I don't know. Just because a company doesn't move fast doesn't mean that they are a good company to work for. Calm and compassionate can just mean out of touch and dispassionate in investing in the future. Having energy and passion to move forward as well as the ability to place your bets somewhere is important too. When nothing ever happens because everything is too much of a risk, work can get a bit tedious. But I suppose in todays climate people will look towards these companies as the holy grail just to get some stability.

layer8 3y ago
You’re manufacturing a false dichotomy here. There’s no contradiction between founders being compassionate and calm (in the sense of level-headed) and also being passionate and innovative. In those small companies where I worked, the work was anything but tedious, and there was no lack of risk. But exponential growth wasn’t the goal, making good products in a sustainable fashion was the goal.
- johhns4 3y ago
  I will back up here a bit as my first claim came off as a bit confrontational. However, I find it a bit unrealistic to expect an environment where you have founders that are very compassionate and calm. The very nature of building a business is a maddening task. Which is something we seem to forget. Most level-headed people would never do it. The very idea of starting something that has a very minimal chance of success isn’t rational. Therefore I do find the traits you describe at somewhat of a contradiction. Many of the most known innovators and leaders are often described as intense, driven, and even obsessive. Their willingness to defy convention, take significant risks and challenge the status-quo can be seen as crazy. I suppose I’ve seen the other side of this coin, in small companies where everything is ”too much of a risk” if it cannot generate a good cash flow within a few months. This is a very level-headed approach. I’ve also seen them miss some great opportunities because of it. Nevertheless, they are still operating and probably will be for a long time. However, I'm uncertain that they have enough energy and will power to "change" the world. Now, I'm not saying that a small company with calm level-headed leaders are a bad thing. But I don’t believe that there aren’t trade-offs. Both have their pros and cons.

layer8 3y ago

You’re manufacturing a false dichotomy here. There’s no contradiction between founders being compassionate and calm (in the sense of level-headed) and also being passionate and innovative. In those small companies where I worked, the work was anything but tedious, and there was no lack of risk. But exponential growth wasn’t the goal, making good products in a sustainable fashion was the goal.

johhns4 3y ago
I will back up here a bit as my first claim came off as a bit confrontational. However, I find it a bit unrealistic to expect an environment where you have founders that are very compassionate and calm. The very nature of building a business is a maddening task. Which is something we seem to forget. Most level-headed people would never do it. The very idea of starting something that has a very minimal chance of success isn’t rational. Therefore I do find the traits you describe at somewhat of a contradiction. Many of the most known innovators and leaders are often described as intense, driven, and even obsessive. Their willingness to defy convention, take significant risks and challenge the status-quo can be seen as crazy. I suppose I’ve seen the other side of this coin, in small companies where everything is ”too much of a risk” if it cannot generate a good cash flow within a few months. This is a very level-headed approach. I’ve also seen them miss some great opportunities because of it. Nevertheless, they are still operating and probably will be for a long time. However, I'm uncertain that they have enough energy and will power to "change" the world. Now, I'm not saying that a small company with calm level-headed leaders are a bad thing. But I don’t believe that there aren’t trade-offs. Both have their pros and cons.