3 ms·

PG: We usually advise startups to pick a growth rate they think they can hit, and then just try to hit it every week. The key word here is "just." If they decid

by c1sc0 14y ago

PG: We usually advise startups to pick a growth rate they think they can hit, and then just try to hit it every week. The key word here is "just." If they decide to grow at 7% a week and they hit that number, they're successful for that week. There's nothing more they need to do. But if they don't hit it, they've failed in the only thing that mattered, and should be correspondingly alarmed. </unquote> Maybe the caveat should be: "If you want to play the high-growth startup game". Measuring weekly growth apparently is a tool that works in that context.

calinet6 14y ago
Perhaps I disagree with PG. I stand by my post. However you're correct, in that context it could be a useful metric when the goals are very focused, the targets are well defined, and the growth is directly correlated. He could be entirely right in this context, you're right. It is my opinion that this sort of thinking builds unsustainable companies. There either needs to be an incredible shift in the way growth is looked at and achieved at some point in the company's life (which to me, seems unlikely or at least a difficult change of course)—or the company can start out with sustainable growth in mind. There is no reason that a company designed for overall quality rather than speed cannot also be a fast growing company; but I think they'll look at their strategy much differently. And that way of thinking will last them through hiring, market expansion, and beyond. Maybe they are compatible strategies and I'm just over-thinking it. But I can't help but see the recent articles about how few long-term successful companies arise from tech accelerators and think how strikingly relevant they are.
- c1sc0 14y ago
  I tried to keep the6pct sparse on purpose. I think it's the focus that helps. But you're right, this should come with a pharma-sized disclaimer & I'm afraid I didn't do a great job at that, not even in the accompanying blog post: http://fr.anc.is/2012/09/26/the-6-pct/ http://fr.anc.is/2012/09/26/the-6-pct/ The key is: if you are ready & willing to play the high-growth startup game

by c1sc0 14y ago

calinet6 14y ago

Perhaps I disagree with PG. I stand by my post. However you're correct, in that context it could be a useful metric when the goals are very focused, the targets are well defined, and the growth is directly correlated. He could be entirely right in this context, you're right. It is my opinion that this sort of thinking builds unsustainable companies. There either needs to be an incredible shift in the way growth is looked at and achieved at some point in the company's life (which to me, seems unlikely or at least a difficult change of course)—or the company can start out with sustainable growth in mind. There is no reason that a company designed for overall quality rather than speed cannot also be a fast growing company; but I think they'll look at their strategy much differently. And that way of thinking will last them through hiring, market expansion, and beyond. Maybe they are compatible strategies and I'm just over-thinking it. But I can't help but see the recent articles about how few long-term successful companies arise from tech accelerators and think how strikingly relevant they are.

c1sc0 14y ago
I tried to keep the6pct sparse on purpose. I think it's the focus that helps. But you're right, this should come with a pharma-sized disclaimer & I'm afraid I didn't do a great job at that, not even in the accompanying blog post: http://fr.anc.is/2012/09/26/the-6-pct/ http://fr.anc.is/2012/09/26/the-6-pct/ The key is: if you are ready & willing to play the high-growth startup game