
All or something (2009) - llambda
http://37signals.com/svn/posts/3106-all-or-something
======
pg
"One of the most pervasive myths of startup life is that it has to be all
consuming."

This supposed myth long precedes startups. If you look at the outliers in any
field, you'll find many if not most are by ordinary people's standards
excessively dedicated to their work. Isaac Newton and Michelangelo (to name
just two of thousands of examples) were notorious for neglecting everything
except their work. The fact that this pattern is so old and so widespread
suggests that it is not a myth.

A startup is simply a company designed to grow at an exceptionally high rate,
and Occam's razor implies that to succeed at this takes the same level of
dedication as exceptional performance in any other field.

~~~
stiff
Einstein had a day job as a patent clerk when working on relativity. Leibniz
did manage to invent calculus, including the notation used to this day, even
though he picked up mathematics relatively late in life and even though he
also had a job and lots of other occupations in philosophy, engineering,
politics etc. You can do a lot if you dedicate to a problem 10 quality hours a
week for 10 years. It still takes a lot of dedication and focus, but stating
as some kind of law that unless you work obsessively all the time you can not
succeed is rather simplistic for something as vague and at the same time as
complex as "success". Hard work isn't a virtue by itself, the capability to do
work is a precious _resource_ , that should be used wisely where it will make
the most impact.

~~~
pg
_stating as some kind of law that unless you work obsessively all the time you
can not succeed is rather simplistic for something as vague and at the same
time as complex as "success"_

Did I do that? It seems to me that what I said was:

"you'll find many if not most are by ordinary people's standards excessively
dedicated to their work."

------
thesash
Unfortunately, the entrepreneurial success story tends to get corrupted by the
noisy example set by tech blogs, and pundits glorifying the investment cycle
represented by companies like Groupon, Yelp, etc, rather than the quiet
success stories of much more common but less high profile businesses that
simply create things that people want and are willing to pay for.

What results is confusion in the minds of young entrepreneurs between what it
means to build a business and what it means to swing for the fences. Big ideas
start can start small, and that does not preclude the possibility of swinging
for the fences, but building the business should be the motivation and the
priority, not visa versa. In fact, starting small, cultivating a product, and
staying relentlessly focused on customer happiness is the right way to sart a
business regardless of how big your ultimate ambitions are.

------
danko
This, to me, is the best counterpoint I've read to Michael Arrington's rant
from a few months back on how startup folk need to work _harder_ and stop
crying.

[http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-
work-m...](http://uncrunched.com/2011/11/27/startups-are-hard-so-work-more-
cry-less-and-quit-all-the-whining/)

Arrington is a romantic, and he believes passionately in the romantic mythos
of the startup world. That's what drew him to the valley to start TechCrunch
in the first place. And that view of the world is warped as hell.

The key is you've just got to match the level of effort you're willing to give
to the level of effort required to achieve the goal you've set out for
yourself. Not all goals -- including entrepreneurial goals -- require a 120
hour a week personal commitment to succeed.

~~~
darrellsilver
To me, the best counterpoint to Arrington's remarks is to understand where
he's coming from. He's a blogger/journalist & VC. The biggest dreamers and
swing-for-the-fencers make the best stories / investments.

Of course, the journalist has it even better: He gets good copy when the home-
run hitter swings and misses. :)

------
temphn
The missing part here is that dhh is talented enough that he can date models
and drive racecars while running both a multimillion dollar business and one
of the world's most important open source projects. Many, perhaps most, aren't
talented to that extent or can't context switch to that extent. They can get a
lot done, but they have to have singleminded (dareisay "24/7") focus.

Moreover, 37Signals is like the boutique software shop that developers
respect, while Facebook is a goliath that doth bestride the world. Zuck is at
G8 summits and truly playing for world domination. If that's your goal, as
long as you know it's a once a decade phenomenon...go for it! The worst thing
that can happen is that you fail and take the huge hit to your ego.

I think there are a lot worse messages out there to our young than "work
really hard on a business". The vacation culture of Europe and the leveraged
culture of the US are about to lose out to the thrifty workaholics of China.
dhh notwithstanding, there have to be some lessons in that.

~~~
billybob
"The vacation culture of Europe and the leveraged culture of the US are about
to lose out to the thrifty workaholics of China"

Whether the Chinese have a better work ethic than Americans, I don't know. I'm
also unclear what you mean by "lose out to." China has a billion more citizens
than the U.S. They __should __be producing more than we are, but at around $5k
per capita GDP, they are way behind our $48k per capita GDP. They may work
hard, but they produce less, likely because they use manual labor for many of
the things we automate.

If they're outcompeting us in the price of exported goods, it's because
they're willing to work dirt cheap (by our standards). As they get wealthier,
they will have higher standards of living and their production costs will
rise. Perhaps ours will have to go lower as well. But I hardly think we want
the average American worker to strive for the life of the average Chinese
worker today.

You do have a point regarding borrowing vs saving. We westerners tend to live
beyond our means, and that is biting us in the butt now.

But again, are we "losing out" to the Chinese because we take more vacation?
Exactly what do you think success looks like?

A lot of people would say that working 24/7 to get a yacht but missing your
children growing up IS losing out. The reward is not worth the sacrifice. And
that's really what the post is about.

------
jcromartie
I'll upvote this if only because I'm _not_ that young, I have obligations, and
I would prefer to have extracurricular activities. I am easily discouraged by
the constant stream of wunderkind success stories, and the relative dearth of
more "normal" people succeeding. By now I think I've realized that this is
because of what sells in terms of news.

------
fuzzylizard
I find that in tech culture--startups, coders, hackers alike--there is an
attitude that if you don't live, breath, sleep your profession that you will
fail. And I wonder if this idea that for a startup to succeed you have to give
24/7 comes from that attitude.

One ruby conference, there were two talks by startup founders, the one
presenter stated that the only way to succeed was to work 24/7 while the other
presenter stated that success only came through working smart and taking time
off to recharge and do other things. Both were successful. Personally, I have
other things that I want to do and the sooner we can abolish this startup myth
the better.

------
meiji
I think there's a general myth that you can't have your cake and eat it.
Startup - work 24/7 or it'll tank. Work for a corporate - work 24/7 or you
won't get noticed and be in the typing pool your entire life. Work in finance
- work 24/7 or you'll miss the deal that makes you millions.

The irony is, most people (but by no means all) actually realise that balance
is important at a certain point and scale back willingly. The startup boom is
no different from people starting small home businesses like they've done for
years. We've slapped on a sexy name, told people you can become one of the
world's richest people but fundamentally, it's the same as making pies in your
kitchen. Some people will be happy making pies for the local market, others
will want a deal to get them into a supermarket.

There's space for everyone, you just need to find the level that makes you
happy. In my opinion ;)

------
alberth
CH blog post comment is so true (can't hard link to it):

    
    
        There is a fundamental difference in philosophy here.
    
        Some startups work 24/7 because they are “swinging for
        the fences” (to use a baseball analogy).
    
        Where other startups, like yourself [37signals] back in
        the day, are content with simply hitting “singles”.
    
        ....
    
        Here’s the philosophical difference, you can live a good
        life on hitting singles, but you’ll never become filthy
        rich unless you swing for the fences.

~~~
jdminhbg
DHH seems to have gotten plenty "filthy rich" hitting singles:
<http://david.heinemeierhansson.com/racing>

People who swing for the fences generally fly out to shallow center. You can
score lots of runs hitting single after single after single.

~~~
alberth
Having a sports car fits into the "you can live a good life on hitting
singles".

Having your own private jet, is when you're filthy rich.

~~~
kerryfalk
This is well beyond your neighbour owning a Ferrari. It takes serious money to
race in those leagues.

And if I recall correctly I remember seeing a video of him racing one of my
personal favourites, an Aston Martin V12 Vantage (Could have been a DB9/DBS,
can't recall exactly).

I would personally consider anyone who can drop six figures annually on a
hobby filthy rich. The one's "living a good life" did the kind of racing I
used to do, and the wealthy guys there only dropped 20-30k/ year racing around
in parking lots.

------
jskopek
My experience has taught me that it can be all or nothing at during a
startup's inception. At my last startup, we had to work incredibly hard to
keep our first customers happy. I do, however, think 37s is right when they
say that you can turn a startup into a sustainable, quieter business much
earlier than most people would assume.

------
peregrine
I'm not sure there is one way to do it. The world needs companies pushing like
the yc startup and it needs companies like 37signals. There is lots of room
for both sides of the coin and the world is not so black and white as DHH or
pg like to make it. :)

------
rythie
Cause and effect switched?

Lots of work probably won't make a failing startup succeed (you are probably
going in the wrong direction or wasting time on the wrong things). However, a
rapidly growing startup requires a lot of time, when it takes off, simply to
scale business (hires, offices, VCs, server maintenance etc).

------
tstyle
It is true that are probably many niche markets that pay respectable income to
people who are willing to invest 10-20 hours per week. It's just like how many
people become successful at their weekend hobbies and sports.

But many things these days resemble a game of winner takes all(social
products, App Store leaderboard, etc...) If you are striving for a top spot in
one of these areas, chances are you are facing competitors who are working
both "hard" AND "smart". The claim that you can work 10-20 hours a week and
stay competitive in these situations just seems overly optimistic to me.

------
yurylifshits
You can work relaxed hours while testing hypotheses, building MVPs,
interviewing prospective customers.

Once you've got to product-market fit, it becomes drug-like addiction. It's
too much fun to give it up for something else.

------
chaostheory
"Most people will look at that and say that’s not me. I don’t have 110% to
give. I have a family, I have a mortgage, I have other interests. Where’s my
place in the startup world if all I have to give is 60%? What can putting in
part-time give?"

If you work full time for a software company, you will probably not be legally
allowed to give 60% depending on your contract. I know a lot of my friends
tend not to read them before signing. Of course this doesn't apply if you
don't do a software start up while working for a software company.

------
hasenj
Please fix the title, this is not from 2009, it's from Feb 09, 2012.

------
funkah
Oh, I thought startups actually _were_ like that, since I've never worked at
one because being in perpetual crunch-mode sounds terrible. Plus I feel like
any promise of some payoff in the future is really a setup to get fucked by
someone who understands finance better than me. I'm not going to grind my life
into dust so someone else can have 4 vacation homes instead of 3, then turn
around and give me a $5k "attaboy".

DHH calls the all-consuming startup lifestyle a "pervasive myth". I really
don't know how much of a myth it is, but if a myth becomes pervasive enough,
it's as good as reality in many scenarios. If enough people believe a dollar
has zero value, then it does.

------
billpatrianakos
I've been critical of seeing so many 37Signals posts around here lately but
this one really is a true gem! He's right, there's this idea that you just
have to work 24/7 and have no life to be a success. Businesses aren't cool but
startups are. What's the difference? These days the difference is one is cool
and the other isn't. One makes you think of the 20-something hipster genius
loner hacker and the other makes you picture a boring mediocre person who
didn't have the balls to do a startup so he starts a "business" (eww, gross,
right?).

~~~
phamilton
Business => J-O-B

Job seems to be a four letter word in some circles...

~~~
billpatrianakos
I never thought of it that way. At first I didn't know what the hell you we're
talking about because of the whole 25 hour a day work schedule people seem to
think is necessary for startups but then I realized a lot of people, in some
circles like you say, do a startup to avoid real work. I'm not saying a statup
isnt real work, just that there is a group of people I've seen who go into
some half baked startup idea because they seem to think if you call it a
startup it's an excuse to play all day with personal projects that have no
business model and hope to god the magic VC fairy will come to visit them one
day.

~~~
phamilton
I blame books like "The 4 hour work week".

It's all based on the misconception that if you work for yourself, you don't
have a boss. In reality, you have a lot of bosses at that point it's just that
they are called customers.

------
keeptrying
Doing a statup now.

There is a LOT of work and a LOT of learning. I don't see how I can get to
launch without working my tail off.

I think this kind of crap us peddled by startups which happened to succeed
because they hit profitability quickly and have cash cows that throw off a lot
of cash.

In a startup your going to be doing a lot of stuff you have no clue about -
your going to gave to work your ass off in the beginning.

But yes, starting a business is different from "startup". Lots of
entrepreneurs dont get that.

~~~
mattdeboard
What is the difference? A startup is a business by definition.

~~~
keeptrying
Every business is not a startup. A startup is a business which doesnt have
guaranteed or well known cashflows. Or rather its trying to figure out its
chashflows.

