
If Steve Jobs was such a bad boss why did so many people work with him? - aniobi
http://www.quora.com/If-Steve-Jobs-was-such-a-bad-boss-why-did-so-many-people-work-with-him
======
TomOfTTB
This is only slightly related so I ask forgiveness in advance. But historical
accuracy is a pet peeve of mine.

That said Steve Jobs bought Pixar after seeing the Luxo Jr video
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxo_Jr.>). The true genius behind Pixar is
John Lasseter and always has been. Steve Jobs just provided funding.

Don't get the wrong impression. I think it says even more of Jobs in that he
recognized a visionary in Lasseter and was smart enough to just get out of his
way. And Jobs did make some smart business decisions like selling off Pixar's
hardware business. But he was not the visionary behind Pixar.

~~~
stcredzero
_I think it says even more of Jobs in that he recognized a visionary in
Lasseter and was smart enough to just get out of his way._

So, he's a meta-visionary? That's what the _real_ angels are, the ones that
succeed, and the rest are cargo-cult wannabes. (Perhaps some also-rans who had
a little bad luck?)

I'm beginning to see more and more that people with entrepreneurial mindsets
need entire sets of strategies for dealing with people who are without the
mindset. Maybe this is the reason why Jobs has a reputation, because his
strategy is to not suffer fools.

It seems like most people in workaday communications are accustomed to
filtering out unnecessary BS, taking the one or two relevant points and acting
on them. I can see how this is useful, but if they ever start working for
someone who only sends a few relevant pieces of information, _they're still in
the habit of filtering out!_

This can lead to infuriating situations.

An example: I send out an email to my assistants. I need someone to complete a
transaction in thus and such a timeframe. They need to get this device from me
and meet with the other party. I tell them it's an 88 key MIDI keyboard, I
give the product number, and _instruct my assistants to Google it_ , so they
know exactly what it is. I give the other party's contact information. Let me
know if you can handle it.

I get no answer from one assistant, but the other emails back and says he'll
be by to pick it up. He comes by, looks at it, then tells me he can't do it,
and looks at me like I'm stupid because it won't fit in his vehicle. ARRRRGH!

I have other examples. It seems to me some people are accustomed to ignoring
75% of communications.

(P.S. The gentleman is no longer my assistant.)

~~~
endtime
Interesting. I think I get stung by this as well - I've been struggling to
understand why my clear, detailed, fluff-free emails aren't effective. The
naive solution seems to be to pad your emails with bullshit, but I think this
would often make them so long that they just don't get read.

One solution I've found is to talk to people in person, but this isn't time-
efficient; another is to write a numbered(!) list of questions at the bottom,
to force people to think about the things I want them to think about. But
neither of these seems particularly elegant; has anyone come up with something
better?

~~~
ultrasaurus
Too many people write stream-of-conciousness emails, where they figure it out
in their head, and don't clean out the cruft after (and if they don't want to
read it, why would I)

I think people have evolved in response to this to scan every email for 2-3
actionable sentences and stop once their queue is full. The best I can do is
to template the email:

[Pleasantries in on paragraph] -action 1 (in 10 words or less) -action 2 (in 7
words or less) [Status updates and other fluff, they can read it or not]

~~~
waleedka
Good point. Another technique I use is to send unrelated items in separate
emails. People tend to use the inbox as a todo list, so getting 3 short emails
is easier to manage than one long email. Once you act on one, you archive it
and move to the next.

~~~
stcredzero
There are others who just act on the 1st email in a group of 3. Fire those
people too!

------
edw519
_The gift/curse of the visionary is that they can see the future as clearly as
they can see the present._

When Disneyworld opened in 1971, a reporter remarked to Roy Disney, "It's a
shame that Walt didn't live long enough to see this."

To which Roy responded, "He saw it before you did."

~~~
3dFlatLander
I really like that, but Roy Disney died after Disney World opened. You may be
referring to his brother Walter Disney (the 'Walt' in Disney), who died prior
to the parks completion.

------
solson
Talented creative people want to work on projects that matter. Steve jobs had
the vision to create those projects. They also want to work with people who
have ideas that are groundbreaking. Again Steve Jobs provided those ideas. Is
Steve jobs a bad boss... I doubt it. It probably depends on who you ask.

This question reminds me of my kid's Jiu Jitsu instructor. People have said
he's a jerk and he's received bad reviews online. I have a different view of
him and so does my son - he loves his students and expects a lot of them. He
wants nothing but the very best you can do and doesn't accept excuses. Does
that mean he calls you out sometimes? Yep. Does it bruise the ego and make you
feel bad? Maybe. But most of the time he's right.

~~~
endlessvoid94
That's an awesome analogy.

------
grammaton
"...but all this "reality" keeps creating excuses, delays, etc. Can you
imagine how frustrating that is if the product is so clear in your head you
actually used it last night? Just get the fucker done! Enough excuses!!! Do
you have any idea of the change in the world this will have, and if I give a
shit about your kids little league game?!? He's not trying to be an asshole.
But if he doesn't say it, he's not being true to his vision. It's a big weight
to carry."

Wow, how self absorbed can the author be? Treat people around you like crap or
you're not "being true to your vision?" Oh no, he's frustrated so it's okay.
Of course if any of his employees responded to their frustration in a similar
fashion they'd be canned....

~~~
jbooth
I don't think the author was so much defending it as explaining the point of
view. If you're fanatically devoted to your product, then it's more important
than any of the people along the way, with all of the good and bad things that
that entails.

~~~
stcredzero
_it's more important than any of the people along the way_

Uh, no. A widget isn't more important than a person. Maybe the quality of the
widget and what it means to the Apple brand means more than someone's _ego_.

I tend towards this value system.

People who equate their ego, their saving face, with their value as a person?
There's too much communications overhead involved with this.

------
kitsune_
Sorry, but I'm about to Godwin this thread:

"If Adolf Hitler was such a bad leader why did so many people follow him?"

I think both statements are ludicrous and smell of intellectual laziness.

~~~
Jun8
I think you've totally nailed the naiveté of the OP. The reason both
statements are ludicrous is that they judge the person in question outside the
applicable context. Hitler was a brilliant leader and speaker, but he was a
monster in other aspects. Horror stories about Steve Jobs abound, generally
coming from people not working day in day out with him. The fact that he is a
narcissistic, egotistical guy ("I'll be employee zero, then") has _nothing_ to
do with him being a bad boss in this sense.

------
daimyoyo
The thing that sets visionary leaders like Steve Jobs apart from your common
CEO is threefold: First, and the article went in to this is the clarity of
their vision. Second is the ability to inspire people to do more than they
think they can. People in these companies often work well above the normal
workweek, yet they aren't being forced or intimidated to. It's because they
are inspired to do so. Finally, they won't accept anything less than
perfection from their team. Steve Jobs was(and is) well known to dress down,
or even fire employees if their work wasn't up to standards. Bill Gates
apparently had no problem saying that his employees ideas were "the stupidest
thing I've ever heard". The first two qualities are what attract the people to
work, and keep them there and the last one is what makes their work stand out
from the crowd.

------
br1
"sometimes it's a vision other times it's a hallucination"

According to Martin Varsavsky, Steve Jobs hallucinates too.
[http://martinvars.com/post/3761365862/mi-dificil-
encuentro-c...](http://martinvars.com/post/3761365862/mi-dificil-encuentro-
con-steve-jobs) (spanish) reads:

"Steve Jobs insisted european mobile networks were worse than american
networks, that Apple invented WiFI and that the iPhone is the WiFi product
with more sales. Stuff simply not true."

~~~
protomyth
I think Varsavsky is a little in left field, but I can see how the Apple ->
WiFi thing got started if you read up a little on some of the experiments that
Apple was doing.

------
absconditus
I will offer a possible explanation that might not be popular. There are
certainly bad bosses, but there are many more bad employees. Many employees
will not be happy with any boss. These people want a friend and not a boss.
Even people outside of this group generally try to avoid confrontation.
Avoiding confrontation seems to be the main goal of the average corporate
employee and it leads to bad work. I am personally willing to tolerate a lot
of flaws in a leader if he or she is actually a good leader. I think that Jobs
may fall in that category.

------
atrevisan
Working for a visionary often brings about opinions on opposite sides of the
spectrum; you either love them or hate them. This is true for Apple as it is
for other tech giants. If you are on board with Steve's vision and can even
remotely grasp what in fact you are working towards, you will love it. If not,
you will probably hate it.

Much of this stems from an outward opinion of Steve Jobs being a jerk, which
will of course vary based on who you talk to. This is true for every
visionary.

Many people will tell you Bob Knight is a jerk, but he was one of the best
college basketball coaches in history. If you talk to any of his past players
that were willing to put in 100% effort and understood what his intentions
were, they would tell you they loved playing for him.

------
ajju
Here's my question: Is being a bad boss a necessary requirement for being a
visionary?

I am betting the answer is no. In my experience you can drive people to work
really hard without being an asshole as long as you are willing to share the
load.

Caveat: My experience is with < 10 people unlike Jobs and Blank.

Thoughts?

~~~
drblast
I used to get this a lot when I led a division of about 20 people. We'd
usually discuss some aspect of leadership, and the classic question is asked:

"Would you rather go to a doctor who has great bedside manner, but isn't very
good at medicine, or one that will almost certainly cure you but is an
asshole?"

It's a false dichotomy. There are a lot of people, however, who confuse being
great at something with a license to be a jerk because in most cases, people
will tolerate you in exchange for your greatness.

But it's not an excuse, and I don't care how financially successful you are;
if you don't treat other people well, you're not a success. There are plenty
of people who manage to do both.

~~~
ajju
Exactly. I think it is a false dichotomy too.

------
pyre
Response to headline: If cults are so bad for people, then why do so many
people join them?

------
marze
I would guess that what some perceive as "bad boss" behavior is simply
unfiltered honesty in communications.

To be as successful as Steve is, one must see the world the way it is, which
requires complete internal honesty.

------
stevenj
The pursuit of perfection is damn hard.

But the process far outweighs the proceeds.

------
VladRussian
considering a choice between wasting your life (very productive between half
and 1/3rd of it) under a bad boss or making [technology] history and gaining
valuable experience under Jobs ...

Hm-m... Why am i not working under Jobs? :)

------
araneae
That's kind of like saying, "if having unprotected sex can kill you than why
do Thai prostitutes offer to do it bareback?"

Making money is important. Steve Jobs could literally be the devil and people
would STILL work for him because cash is important.

------
moblivu
The problem with Steve Jobs and the Apple gang is that, they indeed innovate
first, but then they stop. The iPad was a revolutionary approach at tablet
computing, even if the device was quite dumb. But making your second iPad
exactly the same (sorry but a cover and slimmer does not equal innovation)
that is just plain ridiculous, especially when they have the capability to
make something incredible.

They are just taking advantage of their brand right now, like if they were
still the old Apple that struggled to innovate!

The vision and execution is there, it's still Apple, but now they are just
taking advantage of their market!

~~~
Glide
Whoa slow down there.

This is the company that was nearly down and out and then came up with the
iPod. Then the iPhone and iPad.

How many product categories do you want them to come up with (ok maybe not
come up with, but you know what I mean) before Apple is innovative? A company
is lucky if they come up with one innovative consumer product and corners a
lion's share of the profits.

Besides, they came out with the iPad last year. Their time machine needs some
time to recharge before they can pull more gadgets from the future.

~~~
PakG1
To fairly clarify, while they may not have created any new product categories
with the above examples, they certainly did succeed in redefining product
categories, in addition to dominating. :) Perhaps the biggest thing the iPod
had that other music players didn't have was a successful online music store.
Likewise, iPhone and the app store and multitouch. Carry that over to iPad,
compared to what tablets were previously.

~~~
moblivu
Come on, the iPad doesn't even have a tabbed browser and they still call it
the "best web experience" and I'm not talking about Flash. When you have a
full tablet and you still have to quit your program, go find the settings
icon, to click on Generla to finaly activate your Bluetooth.... it's just
plain ridiculous!

You changed the way people will access mobile information with your first
tablet, but don't get stuck with it!

~~~
olivercameron
Do you think the iPad's target audience even knows what tabs in a browser are?
Or cares? It's entire goal is to simplify computing.

~~~
Kylekramer
I would venture to say they do. After all, every major desktop browser has
tabs (around 11% worldwide are on IE6, but I also doubt those users are
getting iPads). How is a tap and another tap a simplified version of browsing
compared to tabs?

~~~
olivercameron
I'm not saying the iPad browsers window management scheme is better than tabs,
I'm just saying most people probably don't use them. I have no definite
numbers, but from experience in watching people browse, they have a bunch of
windows open and use the Google search bar to type in "facebook".

