

Ask HN: Dealing with insults from older, less capable marketing hire? - HN_adv_seeker

Hi guys,<p>I'm a semi-regular at HN, and dealing with something I haven't had to before at work -- I need some advice.<p>I'm a board member and CTO at a tech company that I co-founded. I've founded and sold (as CEO) a few companies in the last 10 years, and I'm in my mid-30s.<p>We recently hired a 50 something marketing guy; not my preferred hire based on his skills (mostly mid-size business, no tech, no startups). We've been in an uneasy detente since he joined; his first act was to tell me to change our domain name -- mine was to mail him back and tell him he needed to work with me and show some respect, to start by not demanding I do low skill tech jobs.<p>I work remotely, he works with in the same office as the CEO... You can imagine where the story goes from here. He recently asked for a 3x bump in his stock allocation and suggested that his salary be pegged to mine. I told him that it was absolutely not possible on the equity side, it was out of market rates for his job, and that we already had an agreement on these things.<p>Since then it's been sulking, complaining, etc. He pulled out a real winner today when he said in a management meeting that we shouldn't show customers our new product for feedback because that's what Commodore did and then they went broke.<p>I interrupted (see, I'm not blameless here!), and said it wasn't Commodore. He said it was, I offered to make him a gentlemanly bet, and he responded "you were in diapers."<p>My co-founder watched in bemusement.<p>I've made my case that I think this guy is not worth the pay and trouble internally with the CEO; while he's not a key hire, I certainly am. I have no idea what the company would do without me, but I'm getting to a point where I think that life is just too short to put up with schmucks who are rude and intimidated by a younger, significantly more successful player in their space.<p>Since I'm remote, I clearly am going to be at a political disadvantage, and I'm not sure how to proceed:<p>Here's my working list right now:<p>1) Let this guy sink his own ship by cutting all internal support out from under him -- he thinks he's so good; he can prove it.<p>2) Trash him on the board, and try and get some motivation to find a better fit.<p>3) Have a heart to heart with the CEO and tell him I'll be on my way soonishly unless this guy shapes up.<p>All these have some obvious drawbacks; I need the income in the near-term, so I can't threaten to walk immediately, nor do I wish to leave the company our customers, or my co-founder in that situation, as it would certainly jeopardize our fundraising.<p>Both 1 and 2 are just different politics angles, something I absolutely hate, and a large part of the reason I'm in the startup game.<p>I would not personally allow a management team to bicker and insult each other as CEO, but I'm not in charge here, so I'm stuck to my own devices.<p>Okay HN, pay me back with advice! I could certainly use it. Thanks in advance.
======
michael_dorfman
_I've made my case that I think this guy is not worth the pay and trouble
internally with the CEO; while he's not a key hire, I certainly am._

And how did the CEO respond? That's one of the missing pieces from the story--
an outside evaluation of the value of this guy. If he's as useless as you say,
why is your co-founder so attached to keeping him? Could it be that he is
providing some significant value to the company that you're not aware of?

If I were in your shoes, I'd modify your working list a bit, and go with 3B)
Have a heart to heart with the CEO to find out what is really going on here.
If that doesn't clear things up, I'd go to 2B) Make a case to the board, to
try to get some motivation to find a better fit.

I wouldn't threaten to leave, or trash him to the board. Neither one is a
productive move.

Your nemesis obviously has a high opinion of his skills and value. If that's
the case, there should be some clear objectives and timeframes he's expected
to hit. That should make these discussions a bit easier.

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
Thanks, this is helpful, and in the general direction I'm settling on. The
heart-to-heart with the CEO was indeterminate. I am focusing on getting the
guy's description aimed at biz-dev, an area that will be objectively
measurable. If he's successful, we'll just have an overcompensated biz-dev guy
on our hands, an improvement on the current situation.

Regarding his value, I believe he's providing some emotional value to the CEO
which is not material to the interests of the company. This is one of those
'soft-benefit' areas to my mind -- the CEO has gotta be happy, or things just
won't work. On the other hand, there's gotta be a budget for CEO happiness,
and I don't think we are in agreement about the appropriate size of that
budget, or how much is being spent here.

------
skmurphy
For someone with your position in the company and prior track record of
success you seem very thin skinned in dealing with this guy. Aside from his
interactions with you what results is he delivering? I would focus on his
contribution and not get into any more petty disputes (even when you are right
you are making it seem that you are not fit to be CTO or a board member).

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
I'll demonstrate my wisdom by taking this feedback with good grace: you're
right, this situation has really gotten my goat. I can't explain all the
details without revealing too much about the company, but I am finding it this
unusually challenging in comparison to many of the other difficulties I've
faced and overcome in business.

Re: my fitness for my positions, I think I provide good quality on those other
two fronts, but in the end, both those are going to be judged by peers and
customers, so I guess I'll have to wait and see..

Re: results, poor in some areas, (probably) fine in others -- I'm focusing on
getting his job redirected to the 'fine' areas as a start.

------
lsc
eh, personally, my action would be to take a step back and think about it. If
I was in that situation _and I needed a salesperson to move my product_ I'd
make the keep/fire decision purely on his sales numbers.

The question is this: Do you need a sales guy to sell your product? If you
need a salesguy to move product, really you should be evaluating your salesguy
on his performance as a salesguy. If he's moving enough product to justify his
salary, keep him on, and figure out a way for you and him to acknowledge that
you live in different universes. I've been in many situations where it was
obvious sales didn't respect me 'cause I was a nerd, and I didn't respect them
because they were sales. But, I did my job and they did theirs, me recognising
that I didn't understand the difference between sales and fraud, and they
understanding that they didn't understand the difference between engineering
and magic.

Of course, if you can move product without sales, by all means, get rid of
him. But, my experience has been that sales people, when they are being
honest, are not pleasant people, so firing a salesperson for being unpleasant
doesn't make a lot of sense.

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
Yes, this is helpful, and the direction I've decided to try and push his
position to -- it's really a biz-dev position; compared to normal sales, the
cycles are longer, unfortunately. In the end, though, the value will either be
there or not. That said, it might take another six+ months to determine that,
so I'm trying to find my own equilibrium as to how I can live with waiting
that out.

~~~
lsc
yeah, the emotional side is difficult, and I don't have much advice; It's a
lot easier when working for other people, I think. I can say that I told the
boss what I know; if he prefers to get screwed, well, there's not much I can
do, and it's not my money. If it was my company, and I actually needed the
guy, it'd be a lot harder.

------
mahmud
You're not gonna like this. The Commodore story is a classic business story,
and here is the gist of it: Commodore demo'ed a new computer, but CEO hyped up
the subsequent version so much that nobody bought this first version, and
Commodore went down.

Question is, what was the context of his suggestion? Does your product, its
manual or any of the marketing literature make more promises about upcoming
features than what it already offers? If so, then the prick is right.

Further into your comments I find this following alarming statement, among
other passive aggressive remarks:

" _1) Let this guy sink his own ship by cutting all internal support out from
under him -- he thinks he's so good; he can prove it._ "

You just _don't_ think like that. Never ever undermine the business to spite
someone. But get up and publicly and blatantly refuse to work with him, if you
want, but do not undermine his ability to work with you.

~~~
comatose_kid
I think you mean Osborne computers, not Commodore?

~~~
mahmud
Wow, I swung aaand missed.

Yes, you're right. But I have a deep suspicion the OP also meant Osborne,
unless Commodore too has a product introduction fail story.

------
bobds
Definitely talk with the CEO. Tell him how you feel about the marketing guy
but skip the "fix it or I'm out of here" ultimatum.

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
This would be a sort of first step conversation to make sure we're on the same
page is the idea, yes?

------
roedog
It seems that the disadvantage to being remote is serious. I would consider
step 3, a heart to heart, with some fact gathering beforehand.

For example, who else sees this guy for the schmuck he is? Can you recruit
some allies who are in the office every day? How far has he cozied up to the
CEO?

~~~
hga
This may be key; right now it's clear that your perceptions of the guy and the
CEO's are very different. And the CEO does not have (enough of) a problem with
this guy attacking and undermining you. I wonder how important the CEO
_really_ views you to be.

I don't see much alternative to playing the political game or deciding that
you won't/can't and getting out. I know from _very_ harsh personal experience
that no matter how important to the company you are as a techie, others may
not see it that way and let you leave/push you out, even though that then
kills the company.

A lot of it depends on the character of the other players and your personal
relationships with them. Their not having reigned in this tremendously
disrespectful guy says a whole lot to me, none of it good. Their inability to
tell that he's a dud in important area (e.g. why are we still arguing stealth
mode???) says a lot as well.

Or let's put it this way: if they can't see that he's bad, what makes you
think they can see that you're good?

Final note: if you're small enough, you can't let this drag on too long. A
single bad hire like this can be enough to kill a company; not just because of
the mistakes he makes but because such companies don't have the reserves
(time, motivation, energy, etc.) to deal with the whole mess.

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
Hey, I don't have a lot of answers to your thoughts, but I appreciate them.

I agree with comments made above that becoming the problem in this situation
will cause concerns re: my ability to work with any future senior management;
I think that's a key point. I myself have questions about this as I'm not
experienced working with execs as a peer; most of my experience in the last
10+ years has been making the hiring decision, then having someone like him
report to me. Probably all the more reason to execute well on this.

I have plenty of personal protection built into the shareholder agreement,
contracts and daily methodologies of the corporation; not to say I would never
get booted, but it would be a slow and easy-to-spot process.

Regarding sinking the ship, I generally agree with this perspective. I'm not
sure if this particular situation is time critical or not, I still have some
thinking to do about it.

------
brudgers
None of your three options is worth pursuing. All three end with you leaving
if your board and CEO are worth their salt because you become the immediate
problem. A future where every senior hire creates uncertainty about
development time lines is not attractive.

At this point, given your view of the person as a "less capable" "schmuck" and
open hostility from day one, there's little in your post for which the new
hire can be blamed. Osborne or Commodore is trifling. The merits of his
analysis are what matters.

If he's bad, he'll fail on his own. Sit tight, work remotely and try to build
a professional relationship based on your mutual interest in the success of
the venture.

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
Thanks brudgers, I'll be calling you again when I need more advice. This is
short and sweet, and I appreciate it. : ).

------
staunch
It's perfectly reasonable to require that every employee be able to get along
with both the founders. That doesn't mean kissing ass or not arguing, but it
does mean not being an asshole (as determined by each of the founders).

If you want him gone, and your co-founder can't convince you that you don't,
there's only one right answer.

Your co-founder owes it to you to unconditionally support you on things like
this. He should make it _very_ clear to everyone that his loyalty is with you
above all.

------
ddemchuk
Let him go? You aren't obligated to employ anyone

~~~
HN_adv_seeker
My thoughts are along these lines. The CEO's thoughts -- not so much.

