4 ms·

Risk has to be proportionate to authority and reward. Responsibility without authority is a recipe for disaster -- any overworked assistant or salesperson can t

by aristus 17y ago

Risk has to be proportionate to authority and reward. Responsibility without authority is a recipe for disaster -- any overworked assistant or salesperson can tell you that. So... the greater the risk you ask other people to take, the more reward and authority you must give them. At the extreme you are talking about ("they would receive zero income.") the "employees" would basically be cofounders.

amichail 17y ago
But consider a company that works in the way I mentioned that employs 10,000 people. They would share IP and infrastructure. And employees can change teams very easily.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  where are you going to find 10,000 stellar people willing to work in this way? anyone willing to work for no collateral at insane risk either know what their doing and wont be working on this risk, or are probably not really that stellar ;)
- aristus 17y ago
  I think I get what you're talking about, a kind of Randite All-Star team. It's doable at a small scale -- that's what a startup is. But some models do not scale to 4 orders of magnitude. There's the measurement problem. With 10,000 salespeople or 10,000 artisans, sure, you can directly measure the value they create. With everyone else? How about the truck driver? The receptionists? HR?
- deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]
- barry-cotter 17y ago
  Maybe you've heard of Coase's theorem? It's relevant to this discusion. Anyway, above a very small number you can't reliably value someone's true contributions, because there are feedback effects and problems of assymetric information. If you've heard of Dunbar's number that is probably teh absolute maximum anything remotely close to this could work at, and I'd actually be surprised at it working with more than 15 people. But that isn't a company (stocks) it's a partnership. BTW, good on you for doing an app, but the screen is too wide, there's no reason for the scroll bar along the bottom. Also the discussion link is pointless, no activity, no point. Add a highscore thing and ask people if they want to phone home when they get their personal high score.

by aristus 17y ago

amichail 17y ago

But consider a company that works in the way I mentioned that employs 10,000 people. They would share IP and infrastructure. And employees can change teams very easily.

ErrantX 17y ago
where are you going to find 10,000 stellar people willing to work in this way? anyone willing to work for no collateral at insane risk either know what their doing and wont be working on this risk, or are probably not really that stellar ;)
aristus 17y ago
I think I get what you're talking about, a kind of Randite All-Star team. It's doable at a small scale -- that's what a startup is. But some models do not scale to 4 orders of magnitude. There's the measurement problem. With 10,000 salespeople or 10,000 artisans, sure, you can directly measure the value they create. With everyone else? How about the truck driver? The receptionists? HR?
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
barry-cotter 17y ago
Maybe you've heard of Coase's theorem? It's relevant to this discusion. Anyway, above a very small number you can't reliably value someone's true contributions, because there are feedback effects and problems of assymetric information. If you've heard of Dunbar's number that is probably teh absolute maximum anything remotely close to this could work at, and I'd actually be surprised at it working with more than 15 people. But that isn't a company (stocks) it's a partnership. BTW, good on you for doing an app, but the screen is too wide, there's no reason for the scroll bar along the bottom. Also the discussion link is pointless, no activity, no point. Add a highscore thing and ask people if they want to phone home when they get their personal high score.