3 ms·

In my mind this is the key sentence in her response: "I was the wife of the CEO, but that never entered my mind when I hung out with any GitHubbers." That is

by mtrimpe 13y ago

In my mind this is the key sentence in her response: "I was the wife of the CEO, but that never entered my mind when I hung out with any GitHubbers." That is just not acceptable; it's the equivalent of walking around with a machine gun in your hands and saying that you never considered it might have any impact. As much as she might have liked it to, you can't wield considerable power over people's lives and have them treat you as though you don't. It just doesn't work that way.

jrochkind1 13y ago
Your comment about ignoring the considerable power you wield over other people and expecting them to hits home for me. I'm not sure exactly how to phrase it, but I think there's something there in general applicable to the current round of companies which have 'flat' organizational structures, but still aren't hardly employee-owned democratically-managed enterprises. [1] There are owners and bosses, there are people with ultimate decision-making powers (including hiring and firing) and those without, some who have a heck of a lot more salary/equity than others -- but at the same time, the 'flat structure' somehow seems as if everyone's expected to ignore that and act like it's not true. It's of course not a coincidence that Github is one of the most famous examples of such a 'flat structured' (not not actually democratically-managed) companies. And I think it's a shame that people will use this as an example of why hieararchy and authority is neccessary. I think it's more about the dangers of trying to make hieararchy and authority invisible when it actually still exists. Thanks for your comment which helped me start thinking about this, sorry my response is much less coherent. :) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative
- stormbrew 13y ago
  > I think it's more about the dangers of trying to make hieararchy and authority invisible when it actually still exists. I want to emphasize this, because it is absolutely a thing that tends to happen even with the best of intentions from all parties. You can't eliminate hierarchy by hiding it.
ganeumann 13y ago
The difficulty in this for founders is that when you start the company, you need your employees way more than they need you. They have more power than you do at the beginning. And while this slowly changes, it changes even more slowly in a founder's mind. Don't get sucked into thinking you're peers with your employees when you decide how much they get paid, what work they do all day, and whether or not they keep their job. They don't see you as a peer.

by mtrimpe 13y ago

jrochkind1 13y ago

Your comment about ignoring the considerable power you wield over other people and expecting them to hits home for me. I'm not sure exactly how to phrase it, but I think there's something there in general applicable to the current round of companies which have 'flat' organizational structures, but still aren't hardly employee-owned democratically-managed enterprises. [1] There are owners and bosses, there are people with ultimate decision-making powers (including hiring and firing) and those without, some who have a heck of a lot more salary/equity than others -- but at the same time, the 'flat structure' somehow seems as if everyone's expected to ignore that and act like it's not true. It's of course not a coincidence that Github is one of the most famous examples of such a 'flat structured' (not not actually democratically-managed) companies. And I think it's a shame that people will use this as an example of why hieararchy and authority is neccessary. I think it's more about the dangers of trying to make hieararchy and authority invisible when it actually still exists. Thanks for your comment which helped me start thinking about this, sorry my response is much less coherent. :) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worker_cooperative

stormbrew 13y ago
> I think it's more about the dangers of trying to make hieararchy and authority invisible when it actually still exists. I want to emphasize this, because it is absolutely a thing that tends to happen even with the best of intentions from all parties. You can't eliminate hierarchy by hiding it.

ganeumann 13y ago

The difficulty in this for founders is that when you start the company, you need your employees way more than they need you. They have more power than you do at the beginning. And while this slowly changes, it changes even more slowly in a founder's mind. Don't get sucked into thinking you're peers with your employees when you decide how much they get paid, what work they do all day, and whether or not they keep their job. They don't see you as a peer.