
The “Good” Student - _pius
http://steveblank.com/2009/04/07/the-good-student/
======
jskopek
I have to question if Jobs, Gates, or Ellison would actually be good employees
in a large company like Google. It definitely takes resiliency, dedication,
and tenacity to start a company; when you're joining a well established one,
however, those almost seem like negative traits. I realize that Google
encourages employees to try things their way (the 20% paid time they give
employees to work on their own projects pretty much locks down that argument),
but an organization in which every employee wants to do things their way
strikes me as inefficient.

~~~
imp
I think there's a lot of overlap. For example, the three traits you listed are
"resiliency, dedication, and tenacity." There's nothing in those three things
that requires doing things your own way. A big company would probably love an
employee who had those three traits, but deferred to higher authority for
decision making.

~~~
wensing
In those kinds of people it's not a la carte--you don't just get "resiliency,
dedication, and tenacity" and not get "intense, willful, and independent."
They go together.

Unless companies start genetically breeding perfect employees ...

------
tezza
How much is Google trying to establish a cult of success?

Other companies accused of cult-of-elitism are Goldman Sachs & Consulting
firms like Bain. They are considered to actively encourage "Only the best may
enter, the rest can f __k off" policies.

The assertion is that these firms specifically try to attract the talent who
need to be told continually that they are succeeding in life. Some cynics say
that these results-driven over-acheivers had difficult relationships with
their father. They thus crave paternal approval, and the companies exploits
this by filling that Paternal role.

This can be only through continual challenges, and with some of their peers
'not making it'. So the success hounds focus so much on meeting the standards
that they ignore the fact they are being slave driven.

The assertion continues that these very hard working people strive for years
with 95% of the grind work, while the top of the pyramid attend boozy lunches.
When the hard milked remainder reach the senior levels, they perpetuate the
grind for the lower tiers.

\--Disclaimer

These subjective and speculative theories tend to depend on whether you are
Inside or Outside of the chosen few. I will say I am firmly on the outside...
my Pass Conceded in Signal Processing ensured that!! This would put me in the
bitter&twisted group rather than the unseeing wage slave group.

~~~
litewulf
Small side comment: Google is just about the least affirming place I've
worked. I've never been lauded for doing anything "clever", since (I assume),
that should be taken as a matter of course.

One place I worked at my boss would occasionally buy candy and drop it off at
our desk (psuedo-connected to hitting milestones). I'm not sure if I was being
rewarded for mediocrity or some-such, and I imagine that it would vary from
person to person.

~~~
tezza
Hi Litewulf,

Thanks for the insider view.

My previous post was wondering whether Google is trying to set the entry bar
so very high in order to attract some talent that would otherwise go to
Goldmans, Bain.

Google need not exploit them, rather hire them in the first place.

\--

To your point about affirmation... the non-Googles are accused of not giving
any affirmation but the 'reward' of climbing the ladder to become one of the
money-earning Partners. On the outside that may seem cruel, but for the
successful they must feel rewarded adequately.

------
geezer
This reminds of the a study done about hiring practices at Xerox. The
conclusion was that none of the founders and first few employees of Xerox, the
startup, would even get an interview at Xerox, the big established company.

------
archgrove
I'm going to assume the actual statement "Good students are good at
everything" is a quote that is, at best, rather out of context. It's patent
garbage; I often take classes (and advise others to take classes) in things I
know I'm no good at, either to advance from "Useless" to "OK", or just because
it's something I enjoy. My art skills are truly awful and I'll never get top
marks, but it wouldn't stop my taking an elective, because I'd like to be
better and enjoy the area.

People who constantly get top marks in everything are, to me, suspicious.
Mostly anyone who's smart can pick a syllabus they'll ace - but will they gain
anything from it? Now, if they're getting constantly low marks, or random mark
disparities in seemingly related areas, that might be a legitimate concern,
but to blanket it as "Good students are good at everything" is just bizarre.

~~~
SamReidHughes_
You're actually taking the quote out of context. Getting a C in an art class
is different from getting a C in macroeconomics. "Everything" doesn't refer
to, say, athletic ability, I'm sure. There's some limitation to the set of
abilities involved, centered around mental abilities, and art skills might be
outside that limit, in the quotee's mind.

I mean, it's really easy to imagine a "good student" branching out, taking an
art class, and getting a C, but it's hard to imagine a "good student"
branching out, trying macroeconomics, and struggling.

~~~
Confusion
However, it's also easy to imagine someone taking a class and discovering he
simply wasn't interested in it (or thought it was complete bull), only
finishing the class to get the credit. It is silly to judge people by an
occasional C amidst A's.

~~~
SamReidHughes_
Yes, but then he wouldn't be a "good student."

------
scott_s
Except that NYT article isn't really about hiring practices. It's a profile of
Marissa Mayer, Googler #20, who is responsible for the look and feel of all
Google pages, including the front page. The comment about "good students are
good at everything" is probably more how Mayer evaluates people than Google as
a whole.

------
danbmil99
Getting A's in school is primarily a consequence of gaming the system, and not
caring if you challenge yourself or learn anything new. By only taking courses
you know you can ace, you get the best GPA. Taking courses in subjects you're
interested in learning more about is suicide if all you care about is grades.

------
andylei
wait, who is to say that bill gates wasn't a good student? he dropped out of
harvard because he wanted to, not because he was getting bad grades.

i don't know as much about jobs and ellison, but i can't imagine that they'd
be ones to get Cs in macroeconomics either.

------
tsally
I think the worst student of all time when it comes to successful
entrepreneurs is Richard Branson. He's always the example I give when talking
about this sort of thing with friends.

------
meterplech
yeah, exactly. Google isn't looking for the next Bill Gates (although I am
sure they would be happy to have him), they are looking for brilliant
brilliant hackers who can be successful at the problems thrown at them.

~~~
plinkplonk
"Google isn't looking for the next Bill Gates .... they are looking for
brilliant brilliant hackers who can be successful at the problems thrown at
them"

the point being made was that being a "brilliant hacker" has nothing to do
with doing well at school either.

