
Your career is a mess - jonomillin
http://founderdating.com/blog/
======
nlh
I agree with most of what the post says -- entrepreneurs today rarely have a
"clean" linear history, and that's actually pretty cool.

I disagree with one point:

 _At Bloomberg Beta, we have backed founders who we know have jobs other than
the startup we are investing in — and that’s fine. So long as we share an
understanding of how much time they are devoting, and have transparency into
all their other roles so we know there are no conflicts, we think having
multiple interests is healthy._

Yes, multiple interests is indeed healthy. But I really don't think founding a
company should be a part-time endeavor. Maybe a side project is, and if you're
backing a side-project as just that, fine. But starting a _company_ -- a real
business -- takes an absurd amount of focus and attention and shouldn't be a
side dish. I sense there's a reason YC doesn't like to back founders who
haven't fully committed themselves to the venture.

Or...?

Edit: To clarify, I'm referring not to running a personal side project or
hobby business. Many folks can and should do that sort of thing in their spare
time. I'm talking about founding a company - and taking investment - and
building a team. That's where real focus and sole dedication is needed.

~~~
simonw
Starting a rapid growth, venture-backed startup (which is the route YC tends
to lead towards) may be incompatible with other jobs, but there are plenty of
forms of startup or entrepreneurship that are. As the article mentioned,
GitHub was started in the founders' spare time while they were employed
elsewhere. Plenty of startups bootstrap themselves through consulting - it
slows you down, but it also reduces risk which may be appropriate for some
people (people with families to support for example). 37signals were a web
consultancy when they launched Basecamp.

~~~
nlh
Very good points - thanks!

This helps me clarify my thinking a bit: I think the 37signals approach is
actually a good one. The key there is that the team stays together, works
together, and evolves together - even if the actual project of the day isn't
directly related to the company's "core."

I guess what I'm concerned about are the situations where the founders'
attentions are split. "Sorry guys, I can't make this big pitch meeting because
my other job needs me" or "Yeah I'd love to be there for the big push before
our demo, but I have to get up early tomorrow for a meeting at my other job",
etc. That's the stuff that's potentially very difficult.

------
nofinator
Here is a direct link to the blog post for future visitors:
[http://founderdating.com/your-career-is-a-
mess/](http://founderdating.com/your-career-is-a-mess/)

~~~
jonomillin
Thanks! Getting up early makes you do silly things...

------
iambateman
Founding a company can absolutely be a part time endeavor. In fact, why would
you jump in full time before you have reason to believe its' going to return
revenue.

I spent a year working on a doomed concept before acknowledging that it was
probably better to have a job that paid dollars every two weeks.

Eventually, sure, it makes sense to go full time. But there's got to be some
kind of real-money-rationale.

If that's the case, of course a career isn't going to be a clean, linear
sheet. My resume looks like a cobweb. But for some people, one job for 35
years is totally still attainable.

------
jroseattle
I am living this very picture right now. I'm currently interviewing with
multiple companies, and based on the discussions I'm having, I'm convinced
that our resumes are going to change in the next {X} years, where X <= 10.

My resume is very similar to my LinkedIn profile. The primary basis of which
is a chronological listing of my employers (or my own self-employed work.) A
better picture would be to present it with descending chronological/parallel
projects.

The employer-based presentation used to imply something that doesn't seem to
matter all that much anymore. For some, it's still a signal -- I'm sure Google
or NASA looks pretty good on a resume, for example -- but for the most part, I
find that I'm answering questions about project work. The employer is nearly
irrelevant, save for some specific scenarios.

Given the transient nature of our industry, I think the actual employer
details are going to become secondary in importance. To the point that
representation of your background on LinkedIn will be project-based, not
employer-based.

------
7Figures2Commas
> At Bloomberg Beta, we have backed founders who we know have jobs other than
> the startup we are investing in — and that's fine. So long as we share an
> understanding of how much time they are devoting, and have transparency into
> all their other roles so we know there are no conflicts, we think having
> multiple interests is healthy.

I won't comment on the author's general observations and conclusions, some of
which I don't agree with, but this provides yet more evidence that there is
currently far more capital chasing too few startups.

Can businesses emerge out of side projects? Absolutely. But a $75 million fund
that invests explicitly "for financial return" funding part-time founders,
actually believing that it can be certain that no conflicts exist or could
develop, and that said founders can accurately predict and commit to specific
time allocations?

In my opinion, this shows just how desperate some investors are to develop
dealflow.

------
dennybritz
Can't believe this got to the front page "organically" :)

------
padobson
Most people mainly have their labor to invest. I'd say the people who
understand this and diversify their investments are the entrepreneurs this
article is talking about.

------
jackaltman
Hard to disagree with the observation that people are putting more and more
irons in the fire, but I disagree with the author's solution - asking people
to disclose everything they are working on at all times is a bad idea.

The nature of this new world is that most things we dabble in at the very
early stages end up fizzling. Like an author with a new book, people will be
less likely to take important risks if they know they'll be scrutinized from
the beginning.

------
ctblue
With a bit of effort you can have a LinkedIn profile with a portfolio of
projects. It's just a bit more typing and people are often too busy (or lazy
:-)) to do it.

Also, a lot of times people want to make their profiles attractive to
employers and employers want to see you working in one place for a long time
(because they don't want people jumping ship in a few months).

------
lambdasquirrel
Didn't Bloomberg have a hiring clause that said that they pretty much owned
everything you did, even if you did it in your own time? Or has that finally
changed? My understanding is that NYS does not have the same protections that
CA does, which is why tech is a hopeless endeavor in NY.

------
Gonzih
Can't see how that fact can be but not to be OK.

