

Who should you hire at a startup? - swombat
http://www.bothsidesofthetable.com/2009/10/22/who-should-you-hire-at-a-startup/

======
kurtosis
Someone mentioned this the other day, but I don't think it was ever given a
satisfactory answer - is it really worth it to work for a tiny company that
will likely crash? Does the expected payoff from the tiny equity share justify
the insecurity / lower comp / lack of benefits etc.? Shouldn't you be
automatically suspicious of anyone that would sign on to a deal like this? If
they are so great / can execute why aren't they working on their own ideas
instead of yours? I don't think this article ever answers the question.

~~~
gamble
I've written about this here before, and though it's not a popular position on
HN, I don't think that most startups offer a good return for most employees.

There are exceptions. One is the topic of this article: people who are able to
move up a rung faster than they would at an established company. Leaving a
grunt programming job to be a technical VP is a valid reason to pick a
startup. Another is to learn how to run your own startup - of course, you'd
have to be going to a position where you'll actually get that experience.
Heads-down hacking for twelve hours a day doesn't teach you to run a company.

It's the rank-and-file employees who usually get the short end of the stick in
a startup. There are the obvious drawbacks - low salary/no benefits/long hours
- and the possibility the company will fold up. Unfortunately, there's no real
upside for the average employee. The average startup is not going to hire on
enough staff that early hires are going to have much room for advancement.
Assuming the company reaches an exit - almost always selling the company - the
employees won't get a big payday, but they usually suffer in the acquisition.
I've been through several purchases, and it's usually not a happy process
unless you're waiting for a large check. Even if the acquirer wants the
startup's staff, the founders and a lot of the staff will probably be gone in
a couple of years while whatever was attractive about the startup's culture is
systematically disassembled.

Of course, many startup employees probably don't see it this way. Startups
thrive on young grads looking to preserve the sense of purpose, freedom, and
esprit-de-corps of college life. After all, if the last year has shown
anything, it's that most people don't make decisions like strictly rational,
self-interested economists.

~~~
llimllib
> Startups thrive on young grads looking to preserve the sense of purpose,
> freedom, and esprit-de-corps of college life. After all, if the last year
> has shown anything, it's that most people don't make decisions like strictly
> rational, self-interested economists.

It's only economically irrational if you put a value on "purpose, freedom and
esprit-de-corps" that's less than the difference between your salary at a
bigco and your salary at a startup.

------
RiderOfGiraffes
> There are people who tell startups that they should hire the most senior
> people that they can find.

When I was involved in a management buyout we went to loads of people to get
advice, funding, resources, _etc._ Without exception the funding people -
government sponsored in some cases, independent VCs in others - said that we
were light on management skills (which we were) and we needed to find someone
to fill the gap.

They then went on to suggest people who were demanding ukp30k for one day a
week, plus equity. Here we were putting everything we had into this, and these
people were insisting on a full living wage for 1 day a week, plus a piece of
the profits pie.

OK, we weren't exactly a startup, but this "advice" really is given.

~~~
msuster
The people who give this advice have never built a successful startup IMHO.
It's bad advice. Many people give it. Conventional wisdom seldom pays.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
It is, however, also difficult to argue your point with people who have
financed successful MBOs, and who have the money you need.

------
shabda
> There are people who tell startups that they should hire the most senior
> people that they can find.

Are there? Doesnt this article just knock down a lot of strawmen?

~~~
msuster
Yes, many people tell you this, including VCs. That's why I wrote the post.
The problem is that much advice you get as a startup is bad. If someone's done
it before listen closely and make up your own mind whether they have the right
answers. If someone has only sat on the sidelines be more circumspect.

The unfortunately reality of life is that most advice is bad and it takes
people who swim against conventional wisdom to do great things.

------
eb
Speaking of hiring... any startups looking to hire?

The HN jobs section has been empty for a while and the previous "Ask HN: Who's
Hiring? (take 2)" thread is a bit stale.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=759452>

~~~
jack7890
SeatGeek is hiring. We're looking for a CTO and LAMP developer:
<http://www.seatgeek.com/main/jobs>

~~~
pchristensen
I'm neither a CTO nor a LAMP developer, but SeatGeek is awesome and had a
great preso at TC50. Any NYC people should take a look!

------
gbookman
I definitely agree that for a startup, it's better to hire someone who's
looking to step up and build the business, not looking down to grab some
equity.

However, I don't think someone's résumé is the only way to determine whether
someone is looking up or looking down.

There are plenty of experienced guys who have been there, done that, but are
looking to accomplish something really significant. These guys are perfect for
startups because they're just as interested in achieving lofty goals, plus
they already have money to support themselves.

------
vaksel
noone, the whole employment thing is too much of a pain in the ass for an
early stage startup

------
idlewords
Someone who knows when to use "whom".

------
cgherb911
I think there is too much analysis in the article because you'll never find
the perfect person willing to work for little to no pay. Just only hire people
smarter/better/more experience than you. When you're a 100 person company and
you find that your the dumbest one in the entire building, congratulations.
You have a killer team.

~~~
msuster
The point of my article is not to hire the "perfect" person - to the contrary.
People will advise you to hire the "perfect" person based on what they did in
the past. The point of my article was to say hire the person who hasn't done
this level before but is high potential. In every group hiring discussion I've
ever been in people argue for the most senior person. I always argue against
it.

