

Hire for your career - andrewpbrett
http://www.randsinrepose.com/archives/2010/01/04/wanted.html

======
glymor
The literary devices used in this are grating.

The repetition that the beginning is trite. Fake conversations, pretend
thoughts, conversations with the reader, overly hip tone.

It might be normal in a business book but in the end it just gets in the way
of the content.

~~~
simonw
It worked for me.

------
dnsworks
This sounds like a good argument against working for large companies.

~~~
hga
Yeah, but not everyone can follow that advice ^_^, and more to the point,
there are some things we want to accomplish that can't be done in smaller
companies. Jet planes, power plants, all sort of neat stuff.

~~~
loganfrederick
I don't know if it's accurate to say that power plants and jet planes _can't_
be done by small companies. Instead of one big company, the work could be
split among a number of smaller companies.

I don't know the history of Boeing or the major powerplant constructors, but
I'd guess that a lot of them have formed over time from the consolidation of
smaller companies.

~~~
rdl
Ronald Coase (one of the top 10 economists ever) has a paper about this: firm
size is related to factors including communication complexity.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nature_of_the_Firm>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Coase>

There are big problems I'd like to solve (cheap space launch optimized for LEO
satellite constellations, nuclear power), but since firm size for those
problems right now is high, I'd rather work on less-interesting problems which
can be more readily addressed by startups, at least until technology advances
to let <100 person companies work on the big problems too.

