From one who knows

I've had the pleasure of watching Jenny McCarthy perform in two start ups as one who has been up close and personal to the ups and serious downs of a start-up; I can confidently point anyone who wants to work in a start-up or who is hiring into a start-up right to her.  She knows the drill.

"I've been watching this business with Jason Calacanis talking about startup life and responding to the uproar about his tips for how to save money running a startup. You should read these tips. They're fantastic and damn true. But I know you're lazy, so here's the important one:

11. Fire people who are not workaholics. Come on folks, this is startup life, it's not a game. don't work at a startup if you're not into it--go work at the post office or starbucks if you're not into it you want balance in your life. For realz.

Apparently a lot of people got their panties in a knot about this one and it really just proves the point. If this offends you, you don't get it. You don't belong in a startup.... You have to get more bang for your buck so nothing is acceptable short of hiring complete rockstars.

Young, smart, ambitious people will rise to the occasion if you put them in a place where they have to step up. There are a ton of smart kids out there that love to do what they do, will work hard doing it and want to shave 5 years off their career path."

I can only add that the really smart people hire young ambitious (and smart) people, don't crap on them, and let them rise up.

Full Link:  Hiring in a startup

Comments

[Ryan Brooks]

I used to work for a company (which will remain nameless) that did exactly this - they hired "rock stars" and very talented folk, but completely shat on them. Sometimes I wonder if startup owners listen to advice such as this, but don't truly hear it.

[rick segal]

Rynan,
They don't and it is one of the leading problems with rock star talent.

[SoftwareSweatshop]

Young people in general don't have spouses, kids, big mortgages, two cars, and a boat. They can afford to work their tails off and make a real name for themselves. Startups provide that opportunity... and there are very few other opportunities like it.

If these rock stars aren't treated well, it doesn't matter because they can always go somewhere else and succeed. It's detrimental to the owner because the minute they lose their top talent, they're dead (and they deserve to go out of business)

Workaholics keep the world together and whether they're treated well or not, they'll always succeed. Good startups are smart enough to realize that and do whatever they can to keep these employees happy.

Raza Imam
http://SoftwareSweatshop.com

[Varun Mathur]

When I started out, I thought that recruiting top notch folks with stunning resumes was the way to go, but soon afterwords realized that was the wrong approach. I was being naive, even though I was quite successful with it. Sure, that might be something which attracts investors etc perhaps..but it didnt seem to me that one can build a great product with a half-hearted A-team.
Startups are for believers and folks really, really passionate about what they do. A resume cant communicate the fact how much someone would be excited about YOUR project. Everyone in small teams needs to have the "founders energy".

"Hiring people is like opening doors..you open the wrong one...all sorts of bad things can come in and all sorts of good things can leave through it" - Steve Jobs character in "Pirates of Silicon Valley". Okay...thats a movie quote...but it still rings true..doesnt it ? :)

[A. E. Self]

I knew Jason quite well both personally and professionally from the mid- 90's in New York, when and before he launched the Silicon Alley Reporter.

He's a great, aggressive, sincere guy who certainly demonstrated the above advice about work ethic through his own tireless endeavor -- through thick and thin. He did then and he does now practice what he preaches.

By way of reference, everyone in the Alley worked 7 day weeks, day and night, on what would turn out to be the cusp of the dot-com boom -- and we threw some pretty good parties along the way, too. While NYC of that era was very media -oriented, an impressive roster of entrepreneurs and very successful stories emerged -- including him.

My point, aside from vouching for Jason, is that finding great people and infecting them with the workaholic bug is a definitely a challenge -- especially in Canada, where the very notion of employment -- a job -- comes full of entitlements. However promising young people who don't know any better tend to go the extra mile if their leaders do.

My problem as CEO of an IT startup is managing the following paradox: VCs no longer seem to want to back a team that by necessity is going to learn on the job, even though these perhaps not sufficiently demonstrated or fully rounded performers typically strive super hard and burn the extra oil just to prove themselves.

VCs we've been pitching want to plug in new management with proven track records. They ask the founder evangelists to step aside for older types who are super expensive (antithetical to a lean and mean startup). As established and often independantly wealthy operators they require huge perquisites, a giant percentage of the post-$ equity, but insist on lots of legroom to spend quality time with their new families, etc. Try finding one who works longer than 9-5, or who doesn't keep his family in Boston while he commutes to Halifax 4 days a week -- at great additional expense to the startup (planes, apartment).

Because the disparity in job security and pay between the "backable" VC management and unproven but tireless believers is so great, we've found ourselves discouraged from certain very attractive funding deals -- at the expense of top-tier VC backing.

We find brilliant young kids who will work extra hard; who haven't known any better to do otherwise yet -- but we're supposed to step aside and let them be inspired by and report to quasi corporate management types who want to be home for dinner every day?

It's a tough paradox. Finding backable management with a do-as-I-do rather than a do-what-I-say style, and integrating them with the tirelessly evangelist founder team that the whole under-capitalized startup would loyally follow off a cliff is in my view the real challenge. Finding a VC who would properly assess and back the need for this blend makes things even more complicated.

Finding VCs who invest in Canada, who recognize and back the transcendental, maybe priceless magic of the founders' zeal and half-crazed enthusiasm that probably goes hand-in-hand with *proving something*, and will lead the team through impossible hurdles and toward outrageous financial projections -- there's the rub.

I agree with Jason and Jenny, of course. But it points to a greater issue, which in our view is leadership -driven. Finding VCs -- capital leaders -- who will take real chances, and properly encourage founder teams to integrate with backable outside management is a great challenge.

Anton.

[Ryan Brooks]

Anton,

"Finding VCs -- capital leaders -- who will take real chances, and properly encourage founder teams to integrate with backable outside management is a great challenge."

Wow, you just summed up the fears of many an entrepreneur right there. I was recently in a conversation myself about finding investment, and one of the first things - okay, not first, but it was in the first conversation - they mentioned was hiring a CEO, and giving me the grand title of chief technical officer. Not my idea of a good time.

Now, I'll be the first to admit that there are some founders that would be better suited to a CTO role and let a CEO come in and execute the company, but personally, I think if I had my pick between a stiff collared exec who doesn't share the dream versus eating kraft dinner for a couple years, I think I'd choose the latter.

In my mind - and please excuse the uneducated naivety - VCs should be just as much about gentle mentoring as they seem to be about iron-fisted dictatorship. Don't get me wrong, I understand their protecting the interests of their funders, but hey, so am I. ;)

[Chris S]

On the fire the slacker thought: Make it clear that 80 hour work weeks are the norm during the interview process. Cheaper to screen than fire.

@ Ryan
on offering you CTO and bringing in a CEO. Isn't that the difference between investing in a technology and investing in a company. Perhaps they saw the first aspect but you didn't paint the second. Just a thought. Prove them wrong!