5 ms·

that's a very pessimistic view, and one that doesn't take into account the reality of being an executive or board member. i'm a co-founder/executive of a small

by 20180201 9y ago

that's a very pessimistic view, and one that doesn't take into account the reality of being an executive or board member. i'm a co-founder/executive of a small technology company. i have employees that used to be in my position when they were younger, but now they want to just do their jobs and go home. in other words, they don't have intense, heated discussions about strategy, make firing and hiring decisions, make large spending decisions, discuss the financial bookkeeping side of the business, try to raise money from or sell to really unpleasant people, soothe angry customers and employees, because they don't want to. they don't want their work day interrupted by a bunch of anxiety-ridden executive half-conversations and rants with no real conclusions or answers. almost none of their personal money is on the line, and very little of their potential income is on the line. they can go and find another 100k job tomorrow, they could possibly even make MORE money at their next job just by the dumb luck of losing their current one. did you ever think about that? but... now here's the part you won't like: the reason you hold your opinion is because you want something more than what you have now. and that fundamental mis-alignment is going to cause you some level of frustration, because you think of yourself as a shot caller, when you aren't (or, more specifically, don't have to be). and when you're told what to do you get resentful, because you think you know better. well, maybe you do, maybe you don't. but you don't write the checks, and that's what a business is. if you want to be involved at the upper levels, nothing is stopping you. you just need to either find that job, or create one for yourself. stepping into conversations in which you have no context and no skin in the game is a real fast way to get yourself shunned because you have shared NONE of the downside but you walk in the door like you have all the answers. quite frankly, that's bullshit. and quite frankly, even if it isn't, you don't have any influence in that situation so it's irrelevant.

angersock 9y ago
But...that's still the case with the founders too, no? Having a business puts you in a good position to get funding or customers for a new venture. The same labor market for your employees benefits you if you yourself have any technical skills worth mentioning. And your employees might care if they actually had a profit share in how the company did, or saw some direct upside when they did their job better or worse--which is usually not the case. Why break their back for an entitled owner resents them for knowing the value of their labor? You sound like somebody with the typical founder hubris.
- 20180201 9y ago
  i've counted 3 separate conclusions you've projected onto me based on zero confirmed information about my situation. even if i refuted your points, you wouldn't believe me, so i guess you're right just because you say you are. which is sort of what i was alluding to in my last comment.
  - angersock 9y ago
    Lazy, try again. Your last paragraph of "no context, no skin in game" is the same projection you accuse me of. How many workers have to deal with the fallout of arrogant founder decisions? They've got skin in the game too, just no agency. They probably have even more context than you, if they've been paying attention to numbers or if they have their own experience as founders. If you think I paint an unfair or incorrect picture, by all means try to make a case.
    - 20180201 9y ago
      > How many workers have to deal with the fallout of arrogant founder decisions? well, so far, zero. i think this thread is just you venting at me for having an opinion, because there's this image in your head of a mustache twirling asshole.
      - angersock 9y ago
        > well, so far, zero. It should've been obvious that I was talking about workers in the general sense, not at your company.
josquindesprez 9y ago
In my experience, the 'heads down; just let me code and go home' attitude is beaten into a lot of engineers by a series of bad experiences with management. Experiences in which their input is repeatedly ignored in favor of what seems like management bullshit. > if you want to be involved at the upper levels, nothing is stopping you. you just need to either find that job, or create one for yourself. I'd imagine many engineers are coming at it from a slightly different perspective. They're used to being able to self-teach. They're used to REPLs, where getting instant feedback is easy. They're used to having the luxury of rapidly iterating on failure before they get it right. They're used to a world of technical decisions where being smart and right is often enough to win. Trying the same process with management bites them in the ass, and disillusions them. It sounds like you envy their freedom to put their head down as much as they envy your freedom to _matter_. Ultimately, you're not totally wrong, but complaining about the symptoms without treating the cause isn't productive.
- aje403 9y ago
  I understand that may feel that way, but I think that perspective is complete shit for someone to have. Nothing is beaten into anyone. That is a losing attitude in life. Every profession on the planet can involve idiot managers expecting subservience - software is only a slight exception because it involves people with weaker social skills (sorry, yeah) and higher creativity. If you don't like your job, nothing is keeping you there. If you're 35, you have a decent salary, and you have a family or some other thing locking you in, your own life decisions brought you to that point. Any engineer can come up with an idea, make friends, start a company, leave the software world and start a coffee shop, work hard to find a different position with upward mobility. That's easier said than done, but life is not easy and it's full of choices.
- sidlls 9y ago
  In my experience the "heads down; just let me code and go home" mentality is more frequently one part of a general ambivalence or even hostility about things that aren't engineering (or, worse, specifically CS).
csa 9y ago
> stepping into conversations in which you have no context and no skin in the game is a real fast way to get yourself shunned because you have shared NONE of the downside but you walk in the door like you have all the answers. quite frankly, that's bullshit. and quite frankly, even if it isn't, you don't have any influence in that situation so it's irrelevant. If you have any good investors, and at this point I somehow doubt it, this comment just made them shit in their pants and/or write off their investment in you. I strongly encourage you to learn to listen to the folks around you carefully, especially the experienced ones. Sometimes the folks with no skin in the game are the only people who will give you an accurate picture of what’s going on. If you are “shunning” any of your employees for any reason, then you’ve got major problems. If you don’t think experienced (older) people don’t have at least some of the answers and treat them accordingly, then you’ve got major problems. This is true even if they don’t come in with a perfect attitude — note that attitude can usually be fixed with gentle prodding from a skilled leader. If you think that one has to have (significant?) exposure to downsides to have any of the answers, then you’ve got major problems. If you haven’t given your employees enough information and enough autonomy to help move your company in the right direction, then you’ve got major problems. Best of luck... I’m afraid to say that I think you will need a healthy dose of it.
- ABCLAW 9y ago
  This was the impression I got from reading the post as well. Organizations are distributed human reasoning systems. If your culture, personalities or incentives prevent people from sharing key insights, you are hampering your ability to execute.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  So you think it’s a good idea for employees to go to the board with a position out of sync with management and bypass the management chain? I’ve never seen any place in business, non-profit or government where that was a scenario that would benefit the employee unless the employee was very politically savvy, was in a very senior position and had special circumstances (past relationships, etc)
  - 9y ago
warent 9y ago
> stepping into conversations in which you have no context and no skin in the game is a real fast way to get yourself shunned because you have shared NONE of the downside but you walk in the door like you have all the answers. quite frankly, that's bullshit. and quite frankly, even if it isn't, you don't have any influence in that situation so it's irrelevant. I couldn't disagree more. Not only is this is an excellent way to create a top-heavy echo chamber in your company--which is counterproductive to problem-solving--but also lower tier employees will end up feeling like tools rather than contributors. Frankly put, this mindset comes across as very arrogant.
neom 9y ago
FWIW: Keep in mind that 3 years into a 4 year vest with hundreds of thousands of shares that have gone from a couple of cents to tens of dollars changes your "skin in the game" perspective pretty heavily, especially if you're concerned the founder turmoil is going to devalue the share price.
hluska 9y ago
I'm going to be charitable and trust that this comment is a poorly written joke. Certainly, no true co-founder/executive would hold onto such immature and utterly antiquated attitudes. True leaders walk behind. If, on the other hand, you were being serious, I genuinely hope that you grow up and learn to lead before you flush anymore investor money down the toilet.

angersock 9y ago

But...that's still the case with the founders too, no? Having a business puts you in a good position to get funding or customers for a new venture. The same labor market for your employees benefits you if you yourself have any technical skills worth mentioning. And your employees might care if they actually had a profit share in how the company did, or saw some direct upside when they did their job better or worse--which is usually not the case. Why break their back for an entitled owner resents them for knowing the value of their labor? You sound like somebody with the typical founder hubris.

20180201 9y ago
i've counted 3 separate conclusions you've projected onto me based on zero confirmed information about my situation. even if i refuted your points, you wouldn't believe me, so i guess you're right just because you say you are. which is sort of what i was alluding to in my last comment.
- angersock 9y ago
  Lazy, try again. Your last paragraph of "no context, no skin in game" is the same projection you accuse me of. How many workers have to deal with the fallout of arrogant founder decisions? They've got skin in the game too, just no agency. They probably have even more context than you, if they've been paying attention to numbers or if they have their own experience as founders. If you think I paint an unfair or incorrect picture, by all means try to make a case.
  - 20180201 9y ago
    > How many workers have to deal with the fallout of arrogant founder decisions? well, so far, zero. i think this thread is just you venting at me for having an opinion, because there's this image in your head of a mustache twirling asshole.
    - angersock 9y ago
      > well, so far, zero. It should've been obvious that I was talking about workers in the general sense, not at your company.

josquindesprez 9y ago

In my experience, the 'heads down; just let me code and go home' attitude is beaten into a lot of engineers by a series of bad experiences with management. Experiences in which their input is repeatedly ignored in favor of what seems like management bullshit. > if you want to be involved at the upper levels, nothing is stopping you. you just need to either find that job, or create one for yourself. I'd imagine many engineers are coming at it from a slightly different perspective. They're used to being able to self-teach. They're used to REPLs, where getting instant feedback is easy. They're used to having the luxury of rapidly iterating on failure before they get it right. They're used to a world of technical decisions where being smart and right is often enough to win. Trying the same process with management bites them in the ass, and disillusions them. It sounds like you envy their freedom to put their head down as much as they envy your freedom to _matter_. Ultimately, you're not totally wrong, but complaining about the symptoms without treating the cause isn't productive.

aje403 9y ago
I understand that may feel that way, but I think that perspective is complete shit for someone to have. Nothing is beaten into anyone. That is a losing attitude in life. Every profession on the planet can involve idiot managers expecting subservience - software is only a slight exception because it involves people with weaker social skills (sorry, yeah) and higher creativity. If you don't like your job, nothing is keeping you there. If you're 35, you have a decent salary, and you have a family or some other thing locking you in, your own life decisions brought you to that point. Any engineer can come up with an idea, make friends, start a company, leave the software world and start a coffee shop, work hard to find a different position with upward mobility. That's easier said than done, but life is not easy and it's full of choices.
sidlls 9y ago
In my experience the "heads down; just let me code and go home" mentality is more frequently one part of a general ambivalence or even hostility about things that aren't engineering (or, worse, specifically CS).

csa 9y ago

> stepping into conversations in which you have no context and no skin in the game is a real fast way to get yourself shunned because you have shared NONE of the downside but you walk in the door like you have all the answers. quite frankly, that's bullshit. and quite frankly, even if it isn't, you don't have any influence in that situation so it's irrelevant. If you have any good investors, and at this point I somehow doubt it, this comment just made them shit in their pants and/or write off their investment in you. I strongly encourage you to learn to listen to the folks around you carefully, especially the experienced ones. Sometimes the folks with no skin in the game are the only people who will give you an accurate picture of what’s going on. If you are “shunning” any of your employees for any reason, then you’ve got major problems. If you don’t think experienced (older) people don’t have at least some of the answers and treat them accordingly, then you’ve got major problems. This is true even if they don’t come in with a perfect attitude — note that attitude can usually be fixed with gentle prodding from a skilled leader. If you think that one has to have (significant?) exposure to downsides to have any of the answers, then you’ve got major problems. If you haven’t given your employees enough information and enough autonomy to help move your company in the right direction, then you’ve got major problems. Best of luck... I’m afraid to say that I think you will need a healthy dose of it.

ABCLAW 9y ago
This was the impression I got from reading the post as well. Organizations are distributed human reasoning systems. If your culture, personalities or incentives prevent people from sharing key insights, you are hampering your ability to execute.
Spooky23 9y ago
So you think it’s a good idea for employees to go to the board with a position out of sync with management and bypass the management chain? I’ve never seen any place in business, non-profit or government where that was a scenario that would benefit the employee unless the employee was very politically savvy, was in a very senior position and had special circumstances (past relationships, etc)
- 9y ago

warent 9y ago

neom 9y ago

FWIW: Keep in mind that 3 years into a 4 year vest with hundreds of thousands of shares that have gone from a couple of cents to tens of dollars changes your "skin in the game" perspective pretty heavily, especially if you're concerned the founder turmoil is going to devalue the share price.

hluska 9y ago

I'm going to be charitable and trust that this comment is a poorly written joke. Certainly, no true co-founder/executive would hold onto such immature and utterly antiquated attitudes. True leaders walk behind. If, on the other hand, you were being serious, I genuinely hope that you grow up and learn to lead before you flush anymore investor money down the toilet.