

Don't Search for a Job, Create One Yourself - dejan
http://blog.aleveo.com/post/131234548/dont-search-for-a-job-create-one-yourself

======
vitovito
Executive summary: Smart kid can't find a direct way to tell faceless
companies his smart ideas so they can implement them, so he founds a startup
in the vein of Halfbakery, Get Satisfaction or UserVoice where companies can
track that sort of thing, and people can write their ideas up.

Translation from Bitter Whiz Kid to English: self-important child gets no
traction on his resume so starts a web site that he thinks will obviously make
the world stampede to his door and he won't have to get a real job.

Which is great, because even though this idea is nice, it'll fail because:

1\. Companies don't want and perhaps even can't legally use unsolicited
suggestions. Despite the "innovation happens elsewhere" maxim, _no company
actually functions that way internally._ If you suggest something and they
implement it, do they owe you anything? Look at all the flak Apple gets when
they "steal" an idea from a third-party app, whether that's actually ever the
case or not.

2\. The "innovators" that founded the company are just as self-important as
you are. It's their company, they know best, their employees know best, who
are you? "You're just some kid," they say. Start your own company if you don't
want to be the low man on the totem pole, which you did. Atta boy.

3\. You're still just some kid. Or, more specifically, despite all your
experience compared to your age peers, you're still terribly inexperienced in
the ways of the world. Your entire blog post is a rant against the companies
you want to attract to your startup. You have no diplomacy. Go read Richard
Hamming's "You and Your Research."

I'm sure a lot of people here at HN were/are in the same boat. I would
actually complain to friends and family, "Oh, I'm so brilliant, if only
someone would just recognize that and pay me money to think neat shit up, I
could do that all day." I'm pushing 30 and I'd wager my "experience" from ten
years ago was at least as impressive as his is now. You know what? I was a
self-important tool. I did the same things: started a business, did well for a
few years, tanked it, did some consulting for a years, tanked that, started
another business, tanked that.

Then I held two "real" jobs with big multinational hardware and software
companies, and I think I've grown more as a human being -- able to relate well
interpersonally, able to work the system to get my ideas and projects and
wants handled, comprehending the value of networking and somewhat being able
to do it -- in this time than I did the entire time I was doing my own thing.
I _get_ the system and I think landing my next "real" job will be _way_
easier, as will starting my next own business.

People told me this when I was this kid's age, too, and I didn't listen, and I
didn't get it. I _just barely_ get it now.

Good luck, dejan! Try and lay off the bitterness a bit and work on your people
skills a bit more. People will always need to see the "proof" of your
brilliance in the ways they are accustomed to; it's up to you whether fixing
that is more important than the ultimate problem you _really_ want to be
working on.

~~~
dejan
Thanks vitovito, I knew I would get such response from somebody, sometime.
Glad it happened in such elaborated way.

Although I have explicitly expressed to ignore prejudices, you started with
one assuming you knew everything about this kid. Moreover, you compare
yourself and your biases with me. We're not the same, and especially seems we
grew up in different centuries. That makes a difference. The world is not the
same, since this moment I write until you read it.

I accept I am a kid. I am, and hopefully will stay forever as passionate and
young minded =)

\- I am not bitter, especially regarding the job searching thing. It is a
personal reflection on the process. A lot of my friends are going through even
worse things, yet many of them ended up with jobs they hate. I am having much
more luck than it seems in the text. \- The website I've built is far from my
first project, and I don't expect a stampede. \- I've had full-time jobs in
different countries, as well built a successful non-tech (finances) company. I
have great social skills. Want a copy of my CV? :)

There is a big difference between GetSatisfaction, UserVoice and Aleveo. If
you find a real engineer's solution and not a complaint or feature request on
those, I'll accept. If you show me that they are helping people get jobs, I'll
send you a pack of beer wherever you are. If you show me that they are not
Marketing/PR but Open Innovation tools... I'll send you a Chianti from here in
Italy.

1\. I am aware of this. However, your focus is on the wrong thing. I am
talking about lead-user innovation and open innovation. The users >want< to
contribute, but companies are not listening. Would you say a young kid needs
to get a job to have a great idea? If you didn't at the time, that doesn't
meant someone else doesn't: Facebook, Microsoft, ViaWeb, Apple, FedEx... The
list is long. And of course these kids have to prove people like yourself that
they are capable, as all they get is discouragement and "NO" from people.

2\. Exactly. You don't seem to see a problem in that, how the company is
losing?

3\. Rant is a proof of passion and determination I hold. We need more of that
in the world. Go read Tom Peters' "Re-Imagine."

My post has not a single line of complaint. I am glad you responded, I wanted
to make sure it didn't sound like that so I left the starting disclaimer.
Truly, I haven't even read it yet.

The points that are made are that: \- everyone holds knowledge how to improve
the world, companies and their offerings \- everyone can be an inventor in the
same way he can be a video producer, journalist and musician. The web allows
that and the world should adapt to it. \- external ideas are a proof of a need
to rethink some stuff. \- there is no clear channel for companies to reach
external ideas that people >demand< to give. Websites are built by designers
and IT people. There is no business strategy beyond presence and online sales.
There is more that can be done through the web. Accept it or be crushed by it.
\- the way of recruiting is wrong, as people do not enter companies. Ideas do,
so why not take a look at those a little bit for a change, you might find your
gold fish, as Apple and Google did. If you don't care about people's ideas,
you will lose the people, whether your customers or employees. \- companies
should not be "faceless" as you say, and should have same "people" skills you
mention in their attitude. \- companies need more "intrapreneurs" /
entrepreneurial spirit as a way to establish an innovation culture that
embraces agile methods of testing ideas against reality.

I believe that a viable business opportunities can be found in the lines I've
written. I have taken one, not out of bitterness, but passion to test against
the world.

If I do attack businesses, than every single business book (good one at least)
does.

Thank you for your sincere reply, you gave me space for a reflection on my
thoughts. Your points are clear and valid, but that is exactly why I want to
stand up to them. They shouldn't be. Not today. Not ever again.

~~~
vitovito
Oh, the poster really is you! haha!

I would wager your story is very similar to mine, and to others here. It's why
we're here, after all.

Balsamiq uses Get Satisfaction to take in feature requests from users, and
they go back and forth with wireframes and mockups right there on the site.
That's part of their culture, that's not a function of the site. It sounds
like you're trying to fix a sociological problem with technology.

1\. If a company is not set up, top to bottom, culture to practice, to take in
outside feedback, the effort will fail. The development culture and practice
within a company that treats constructive criticism from their users/customers
as first-rate along with their internal QA and engineers is completely
different from one that doesn't. You see this in any company that releases an
SDK, publishes an API or licenses technology. Some will rearchitect entire
APIs because they realized they got in wrong once people started trying to use
it. Some will pack up their ball and go home.

Having spent years running support and developer relations teams, my cynicism
tells me the companies you will attract will be the latter, trying to be the
former. The former doesn't need you; they can do it themselves, because they
believe in it already. The latter will use you, but will fail internally
because they don't really want to listen. You can't change a business model
and internal culture with a web site. Now, with management and process
consultants...

2\. No, I don't care how the company is losing. It's a _company_. It's not a
person whose life I can materially improve by helping it. It's a bureaucracy
that exists to extract profit at the expense of its customers and employees.
Inventing something that improves a _particular_ coffee maker doesn't help
anyone but the shareholders of the coffee maker making company; everyone who
bought that particular coffee maker isn't going to get a free replacement. You
would better serve the _people who have the same problem with the same coffee
maker_ by publishing a fix and offering replacement widgets via mail for some
token amount, or by making your own coffee maker that solves all those
problems and more.

3\. I'm not going to go back and re-read the post to highlight specific
complaints, but the entire _tone_ , I find, is one of bitterness. It's not
wide-eyed idealism, it's "I'll show you all," which comes across quite
differently. This is the lack of diplomacy I mean.

Your "points that are made are that" paragraph here is better, but remember
that your beliefs aren't everyone else's.

I believe that most people don't want to be inventors, producers, journalists
or musicians. Most people don't "demand" to give ideas. Most people don't
think that hard about anything at all, but technology in particular, as the
priesthood culture of technology has trained people to believe that if
something is wrong with technology, it's really their own fault (I'd quote
from DoET, but I can't find my copy). And, of those people that have ideas,
most lack the subversiveness to do anything about them.

Despite all of these things, I really hope you find both some success with
this and in the future. I hope I'm wrong and you change the world. But, if I'm
not, I hope you come to understand why at a level deeper than "no-one got it,"
because that greater comprehension of the system of the world is what will
really help in your next venture.

~~~
dejan
Well, I like the tone of this post also much better :) Yes I am the poster, I
got the insults there previously a bit personal :)

I agree with you that it is a sociological problem being tackled here. Indeed,
if we succeed in this it will be a great social innovation. I am far from
seeing it easy and obvious, but a bumpy ride we're all going to learn from. As
I see now, we'll either become a full fledged channel for embedding
constructive feedback to companies, or a new recruiting place with a
different, proactive method.

However, I am not the one inventing this thing up just to prove something to
companies. My statements are based on Eric Von Hippel's work from the 80s:
"The Sources of Innovation" and "Democratizing Innovation" - The Lead User
Theory. And you need to see that this is not something new, as many are
already doing it. The only thing is - they have to ask for it - explicitly
like Dell and Starbucks, implicitly like Lego and Harley Davidson. What we
suggest is something to enrich it a bit more - self initiated input, whether
it is a current user or not. Moreover, we are giving back for the input, they
aren't, while they still get the input? People want to contribute, Open
Source, wikis, this discussion we are having here (thank you).

You are right that most people do not want to participate and as you say out
of those that have ideas most lack the willingness to act. We are trying to
make them share, and maybe when others see they'll change their mind? I don't
know, that is truly brave thing to ask, so lets see where it goes?

The target audience are young people and students, who are given incentives
and awards for it. I guess for money and recommendations as well visibilities,
students "want to be inventors, journalists and musicians." If it helps them
get closer to companies, why not? I truly believe that student ideas should be
seen by companies, and others.

Also, we are not founded as a company yet, and maybe we'll take the route of a
non-profit. Call this a big experiment, we'll all learn something from it.

I do not expect anyone to agree with me on the blog post, those are truly
personal beliefs. I didn't attack anyone in particular but processes, so I
don't see a reason for any revolt from anyone.

Thank you for these insights, and regarding #3 I will rewrite the tone later
so I don't get my head chopped off, served something else rather than coffee
in a bar, or hit by a bus :))

~~~
vitovito
As long as you know what you're getting into. ;) I don't disagree with your
blog post generally, I just am not sure you'll get the sort of buy-in you want
from companies you want. Doesn't mean you shouldn't try, and I'm glad you are.

I picked up Tom Peters' book, Re-Imagine. I'll check out the 80s works you
cited, too.

I assume you've read The Cluetrain Manifesto?

Good luck!

