3 ms·

I think by adulthood, most personality traits are relatively set and unchangeable (there’s always exceptions). If someone is a hard worker, apathetic worker, se

I think by adulthood, most personality traits are relatively set and unchangeable (there’s always exceptions). If someone is a hard worker, apathetic worker, self-driven, praise-driven, exhibits or causes learned helplessness, etc. — you’re certainly not going to change these traits as a manager. The goal of a small company that aims to do well then is to hire the right people from the very start. Unfortunately, as a company’s success grows, the “wrong people” are going to want into it. Keeping these people out is a much more challenging problem than finding a decent group of people to start a company with, because the wrong people are motivated in all the wrong ways to destroy what already exists (or extract what value they can from it) rather than to create something great which does not yet exist, arguably a much riskier and more complicated endeavor.

MichaelZuo 2y ago
There is the possibility of making punishments much harsher, to adjust for the reduced probability of catching wrongdoing. But the benefits will likely also have to be increased, to still make it an attractive place to work for those with the desired personality traits.
- Nasrudith 2y ago
  "Just make the punishments harsher to make up for reduced probability of catching wrongdoing." is and always has been an absolutely terrible strategy and the epitome of stupid-evil. The Qin Dynasty tried that and wound up lasting for only fifteen years. They had rebellions twice caused because the alternative was death anyway, including one which had them supplanted.
  - MichaelZuo 2y ago
    Notably the Mongol empire, much much bigger than the Qin, and in some ways even harsher, lasted for over a century in a relatively stable fashion. So historical examples don’t provide much unambiguous evidence.
charlie0 2y ago
It's basically impossible to keep the "wrong" people out based on personality traits. People who are lazy eventually learn to lie and BS themselves into a job. They migjt work hard for a month or two before tney revert base to their baseline. You can only gauge these traits though indirect and imperfect proxies. The best bet will always be word of mouth.
nonameiguess 2y ago
To the extent this is really a problem, it's broader than people focused on single companies seem to want to acknowledge. Globally, there are employers and employees and some balance of them such that the number of people employed in a functional economy is a huge supermajority and almost has to be for the health of the society. Just as not every child in Lake Woebegone can be above average, this means not every company can only hire highly driven overachievers. As a company grows, its workforce grows and becomes closer and closer to the traits of the larger general population. If you ever grew large enough to be the only company in the world, your workforce would be the general population. At that point, it would be full of below average people. The only way to keep them out forever is to not grow. They're not the "wrong" people. At societal scale, to at least some employers, they're the only people who exist.

MichaelZuo 2y ago

There is the possibility of making punishments much harsher, to adjust for the reduced probability of catching wrongdoing. But the benefits will likely also have to be increased, to still make it an attractive place to work for those with the desired personality traits.

Nasrudith 2y ago
"Just make the punishments harsher to make up for reduced probability of catching wrongdoing." is and always has been an absolutely terrible strategy and the epitome of stupid-evil. The Qin Dynasty tried that and wound up lasting for only fifteen years. They had rebellions twice caused because the alternative was death anyway, including one which had them supplanted.
- MichaelZuo 2y ago
  Notably the Mongol empire, much much bigger than the Qin, and in some ways even harsher, lasted for over a century in a relatively stable fashion. So historical examples don’t provide much unambiguous evidence.

charlie0 2y ago

It's basically impossible to keep the "wrong" people out based on personality traits. People who are lazy eventually learn to lie and BS themselves into a job. They migjt work hard for a month or two before tney revert base to their baseline. You can only gauge these traits though indirect and imperfect proxies. The best bet will always be word of mouth.

nonameiguess 2y ago

To the extent this is really a problem, it's broader than people focused on single companies seem to want to acknowledge. Globally, there are employers and employees and some balance of them such that the number of people employed in a functional economy is a huge supermajority and almost has to be for the health of the society. Just as not every child in Lake Woebegone can be above average, this means not every company can only hire highly driven overachievers. As a company grows, its workforce grows and becomes closer and closer to the traits of the larger general population. If you ever grew large enough to be the only company in the world, your workforce would be the general population. At that point, it would be full of below average people. The only way to keep them out forever is to not grow. They're not the "wrong" people. At societal scale, to at least some employers, they're the only people who exist.