4 ms·

Even before the author mentioned this was marketing, I was telling myself "this is marketing". Perhaps the term "growth hacker" has arisen because "marketing"

Even before the author mentioned this was marketing, I was telling myself "this is marketing". Perhaps the term "growth hacker" has arisen because "marketing" has gotten a bad rep. In the world of 1990s software development, marketing drove features based on market research, making developers resent the idiosyncratic nature of the user community, and their proxy: the marketing guy (almost as much as the sales guy who would promise something that wasn't even under development). In the post 2000s world, every developer dreams of internet gold and striking it rich with their idea (and a marketing guy would corrupt that), so a "growth hacker" sounds less "evil" and more like someone a developer could work with, even though they will likely alter the concept of the product to make it "marketable" (ie, "pivot" the project)

mindcrime 14y ago
Perhaps the term "growth hacker" has arisen because "marketing" has gotten a bad rep. It only has a "bad rap" among people who are fairly clueless about what marketing actually is, and/or people who hasty assessments based on limited data points. So, a hacker worked for a startup where the "marketing guy" was seen as evil, and now "marketing has a bad rap" seems to be the meme here. And that would be silly. Marketing is damn interesting stuff and it's absolutely crucial to a successful business. And good marketers, like good developers, are talented, skilled and hardworking. And, also like good developers, they're hard to find.
- sageikosa 14y ago
  I don't disagree. That they may have acquired a bad rep (amongst developers, or perhaps hackers) wasn't a value judgment, just an observation. I try to separate the individuals holding a position from the position itself. I've met great sales people, marketers, testers and subject matter experts. I've also met bad project managers, directors, software architects, and developers. I think if there was any reason for general business functions to get a bad rep in the late 1990s, it was probably due to the glut of post-Reagan-era business school graduates, the dearth of traditional large corporate organizations to fill them (by then, military-industrial downsizing was underway and heavy industry was moving offshore), and the boom-time investment craze of the early ".COM" era, leading to the ready availability of job roles which could be absorbed (and were often demanded) by investment capital.
  - mindcrime 14y ago
    I think if there was any reason for general business functions to get a bad rep in the late 1990s, it was probably due to the glut of post-Reagan-era business school graduates, the dearth of traditional large corporate organizations to fill them... Yeah, that's reasonable. A lot of things definitely changed in the 80's and bled over into the 90's. The era of "right-sizing" and "re-engineering" and the proliferation of TLA's and buzzwords, and the breaking of that traditional company/employee bond, definitely could have (did?) lead to some perception changes of "business people." That said, I think there's always been (and maybe always will be, as much as I wish it were othewise) a gulf between the technology world and the business world. It's like the people on each "side" don't really understand each other, don't really want to understand each other, and each underestimates the value of the other. sigh

mindcrime 14y ago

Perhaps the term "growth hacker" has arisen because "marketing" has gotten a bad rep. It only has a "bad rap" among people who are fairly clueless about what marketing actually is, and/or people who hasty assessments based on limited data points. So, a hacker worked for a startup where the "marketing guy" was seen as evil, and now "marketing has a bad rap" seems to be the meme here. And that would be silly. Marketing is damn interesting stuff and it's absolutely crucial to a successful business. And good marketers, like good developers, are talented, skilled and hardworking. And, also like good developers, they're hard to find.

sageikosa 14y ago
I don't disagree. That they may have acquired a bad rep (amongst developers, or perhaps hackers) wasn't a value judgment, just an observation. I try to separate the individuals holding a position from the position itself. I've met great sales people, marketers, testers and subject matter experts. I've also met bad project managers, directors, software architects, and developers. I think if there was any reason for general business functions to get a bad rep in the late 1990s, it was probably due to the glut of post-Reagan-era business school graduates, the dearth of traditional large corporate organizations to fill them (by then, military-industrial downsizing was underway and heavy industry was moving offshore), and the boom-time investment craze of the early ".COM" era, leading to the ready availability of job roles which could be absorbed (and were often demanded) by investment capital.
- mindcrime 14y ago
  I think if there was any reason for general business functions to get a bad rep in the late 1990s, it was probably due to the glut of post-Reagan-era business school graduates, the dearth of traditional large corporate organizations to fill them... Yeah, that's reasonable. A lot of things definitely changed in the 80's and bled over into the 90's. The era of "right-sizing" and "re-engineering" and the proliferation of TLA's and buzzwords, and the breaking of that traditional company/employee bond, definitely could have (did?) lead to some perception changes of "business people." That said, I think there's always been (and maybe always will be, as much as I wish it were othewise) a gulf between the technology world and the business world. It's like the people on each "side" don't really understand each other, don't really want to understand each other, and each underestimates the value of the other. sigh