

Characteristics of a great startup culture - jyothi
http://www.techflash.com/venture/Thirteen_characteristics_of_a_great_startup_culture_45678557.html

======
daeken
"You can literally feel it when you walk into a great start-up culture. The
room has energy. There’s a buzz. Doors are open. Whiteboards are filled with
hieroglyphics. People are getting stuff done. Meetings are short and to the
point. You might trip over a dog."

This is quite possibly the best possible description of a good startup.

~~~
jerryji
Right, yes, good, ... a DOG?

Running a startup should be like going into a war about survival -- do you
bring your pet dog to the war?

Yours, Insensitive Clod

~~~
ggruschow
It's not unheard of ( <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogs_in_warfare> ), after
all, people routinely take their best friend into war.. so taking "man's best
friend" makes plenty of sense.

That said, my office is in a no-pets building, and I'm happy for it. It makes
it a non-issue.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
This web page reliably crashes my web browser (complicated situation - don't
ask) so I've pulled out the plain text of the item for my own consumption.
Posting the whole thing here amounts to outright plagarism, so I won't do
that.

Here, however, are the highlights:

Greg Gottesman: ... the three most important factors in determining the
success of a start-up are (1) team, (2) product or service, and (3) market
(timing, size, etc.).

... added one factor to the must-have list: the right start-up culture.

    
    
      1. No politics
      2. It's not a job, it's a mission.
      3. Intolerance for mediocrity.
      4. Watching pennies.
      5. Equity-driven.
      6. Perfect alignment.
      7. Good Communication, Even in Bad Times.
      8. Strong leadership.
      9. Mutual respect.
     10. Customer-obsessed.
     11. High energy level.
     12. Fun.
     13. Integrity.

~~~
ggruschow
I'm question the value of "Equity-driven." Equity - possibly
counterproductively - bundles the distribution of 3 very different things:
profit, sale, and decisions.

Trying for both profit and sale creates conflict unless all workers and
investors share views and desires. For example, an investor roadshow typically
hurts profits for sale proceeds. Or more complicated, imagine one investor is
a fund that's forced to liquidate due to losses as the market goes into a
panic. Selling is likely to hurt everyone else. Of course, increasing sale
value sometimes requires working for some profits, but there's no guarantee
that's the best route for profits. At best, you usually end up compromised.

Decision rights (typically voting) are even more complicated. Many think it
shouldn't have the same weights and rights as the other parts, so they try to
rectify it with share classes and complicated operating agreements. That's
crude, expensive, and each "fix" becomes exponentially harder. Tying voting to
the other two only seems logical as a way to support sale value.

I'm all for massive (up to total) profit-sharing, but I'm less sure about the
others, especially as entangled by equity. Venture/angel-backed start-ups
logically will end up either in utter failure or conflict. It seems like it'd
only make sense for someone long-term if they turn into a more typical public
corporation big-shot post-sale.

------
anshul
> 1\. No politics. In great start-up cultures, everybody is giving everybody
> else credit.

No. That is just cheapening credit. No politics means giving credit where it's
due and when it's due. In a good start up, people don't care much about giving
or getting credit except for cool, remarkable and worthy things.

Everyone giving everyone else credit... That is what actually leads to some
really poor cultures.

~~~
sokoloff
Everyone giving everyone else credit for _something_ is a good culture.

Everyone giving everyone else credit for _any individual thing_ or for
_everything_ is not a good culture.

The first means that everyone at the company is being acknowledged as
contributing, which usually means that they are in fact contributing.

If I'm the "tech guy" and I can't give credit to the business or marketing or
finance guy because deep down I don't respect what they do or think that it's
my contributions that are making the startup go, then we're in for a bumpy
road.

------
edw519
"What did I miss?"

You just _have_ to do it.

You came close with #2 (It's Not a Job, It's a Mission).

The best analogy is could think of is the question, "How hard will you try to
teach your baby to walk before you give up?"

The only answer I've ever heard to this was, "Huh?" The idea of giving up
before your child walks (with obvious exceptions) is alien to parents.

The same thing is true in great startup culture. "Not succeeding" is never an
acceptable alternative.

