> Secondly, be mindful of the company culture you create and the people you bring on board. They can either make or break your organization.
I don't think that this cautionary statement will make much of a difference, but I completely agree.
Founders deliberately create the culture of their dreams, and don't particularly care what anyone else thinks. It's a big part of the reason they are founding the endeavor. They don't want to deal with people that they believe will deter/hobble them. The boss gets what the boss wants.
In some cases, I'm sure it's worked out well.
In others ... maybe not so much.
I've found that cultures that deliver great projects are often not "comfortable" ones. In my experience, the sickest organizations have been ones where everyone was always "on the same page," and there was little disagreement.
Being "on the same page" has two forms, one of which is healthy and the other is not.
In organizations where everyone is trying to achieve the same broad goal, but have different ideas on how to achieve that goal, people are much more likely to propose novel ideas or changes which are healthy, and the business more readily adapts.
In organizations where people are just saying "yes" to whatever the person above them said, important information that needs to bubble up cannot, mistakes are made, people are thrown under the bus, and it becomes a toxic hellscape.
On the other hand, I've seen organizations where leaders were not "on the same page" and that lead to constant inter-department struggles. One would end up, by accident or intent, undermining another because they didn't have the same vision or strategy for getting there. Until someone up top is willing to lay down the law, being a manager in such an organization is effectively no different than being a politician.
I think every team/project needs a goat who will argue that the strategy being chosen is wrongheaded and will lead to problems. And who will also enthusiastically work to succeed with that strategy after being outvoted or overruled, while keeping their objections in mind and working hard to avoid them as much as possible.
Some people who have the final say can't stand a goat, and take any negativity about their vision as a cue to start figuring out how to get rid of that negativity. They often code that as a bad culture fit.
When I worked for a Japanese company, we were expected to voice objections and disagreements, during the deliberation process. However, after the decision was made, we were expected to close ranks, and fall in line.
I learned to do this.
I have found, when working with Americans, that voicing any objections (especially while being criminally old) would result in my being named a "negative naysayer," and all my input would be stricken from the record, and forevermore ignored.
It isnt always deliberate. I know companies that were two male founders of a specific race that then hired people they knew from their networks for their first few hires. All of a sudden they realized they were a 10+ person company and everyone was exactly like them.
All of a sudden, hiring anyone who wasnt very like them became difficult. Have you ever tried to hire a female for an all male company? Have you ever tried to hire a Muslim for a company that is entirely Orthodox Jewish? Sometimes you just hire who you know until you realize you've created an environment that might be very difficult to grow further.
I don't think that this cautionary statement will make much of a difference, but I completely agree.
Founders deliberately create the culture of their dreams, and don't particularly care what anyone else thinks. It's a big part of the reason they are founding the endeavor. They don't want to deal with people that they believe will deter/hobble them. The boss gets what the boss wants.
In some cases, I'm sure it's worked out well.
In others ... maybe not so much.
I've found that cultures that deliver great projects are often not "comfortable" ones. In my experience, the sickest organizations have been ones where everyone was always "on the same page," and there was little disagreement.