tips - Daniel Jomphe on Diigo

16Expand

Stevey's Blog Rants: Done, and Gets Things Smart

Tags: interview, tips on 2008-06-29 and saved by7 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromsteve-yegge.blogspot.com

We already talked about that, right? You're a good programmer! Heck, you're a great programmer! You're "smart", so anything you don't know you can go look up if you need it! Right?

Welcome to incompetence.
How do you hire someone who's smarter than you? How do you tell if someone's smarter than you?

This is a problem I've thought about, over nearly twenty years of interviewing, and it appears that the answer is: you can't. You just have to get lucky.
But interviews are conducted under pretty artificial conditions, and as a result they wind up being most effective at hiring people who are good at interviewing.
As far as identifying good people goes, the best solution I've ever seen was at Geoworks, where you were required to do a six-month internship before you could get hired full-time. This seems to be the norm in non-tech departments at most tech companies. They often substitute "contractor" for "intern", but it works out roughly the same. Geoworks is the only company I've seen stick to their guns and make it mandatory for engineers.
However, I'm convinced that it only worked because Geoworks seeded the engineering staff with great people. The founding engineers set up a truly beautiful software engineering environment, with lots of focus on tools, mentoring, continuing education, "anarchy projects" to let off steam and encourage innovation, and a host of other goodnesses.
I've been a contractor at companies that had no good engineers at all, literally none whatsoever. A mandatory six-month internship at such companies would only serve to lower their average bar, since anybody competent would leave after the six months was up.
At Google, you don't have to do an internship. However, unlike at most other companies, you're not "slotted" into a real position on the tech ladder until you've been on the job at least six months. During that time you need to prove that you can function at the level you were hired for, and if it's wrong in either direction your level is adjusted at slotting time.
Geoworks, Amazon, and Google, all of whom had one thing in common: they hired brilliant seed engineers.
For your startup (or, applying the recursion, for your new project at your current company), you don't want someone who's "smart". You're not looking for "eager to learn", "picks things up quickly", "proven track record of ramping up fast".

No! Screw that. You want someone who's superhumanly godlike. Someone who can teach you a bunch of stuff. Someone you admire and wish you could emulate, not someone who you think will admire and emulate you.
Someone who always seems to be finishing stuff so fast it makes your head spin. That's what my Done clause means. It means they're frigging done all the time.
They never seemed to be working that hard, but they were not only 10x as productive as their peers, they also managed technical feats that were quite frankly too scary for anyone else. They could (as just one trait) dive in and learn new languages and make fixes to tools that the rest of us assumed were, I dunno, stuff you'd normally pay a vendor to fix. They dove into the hairiest depths of every code base they encountered and didn't just add features and make fixes; they waved some sort of magic wand and improved the system while they were in there: they would Get Things Smart. Make the systems smarter, that is. Sort of like getting your act together, but they'd do it for your code.
You can't interview these people. For starters, they're not interested; these are the people that companies hold on to as long as humanly or companyly possible.
If you could mix in one Done, and Gets Things Smart person with every five to ten Smart, and Gets Things Done people, then you'd be in good shape, since the latter, being "smart", can hopefully learn a lot from the former.
But when you're starting a company, or an organization, or a big project, the need for Done, and Gets Things Smart seed engineers is desperate. It's dire, in the sense that if you don't get the right seed people in place, you're dooming your organization to mediocrity, if you manage to succeed at all.
Because technical brilliance, seemingly superhuman productivity, and near-militaristic adherence to software discipline aren't enough. They also need leadership skills. They don't have to be great leaders; in fact in a pinch, just being bossy might work for a while, as long as they're bossing people in the right directions. But they need to have the ability to guide the organization (or new team, or whatever) in uniformly excellent directions, which requires some leadership, even if it's bad or amateurish leadership.
You still want to hire the Smart, and Gets Things Done folks. But those folks have a long way to grow, and they probably have absolutely no idea just how far it is. So you want some Done, and Gets Things Smart people to guide them.

Yahoo!'s Latest Performance Breakthroughs (Yahoo! Developer Network blog)

Tags: web, performance, tips, yahoo, optimization on 2008-05-21 and saved by9 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromdeveloper.yahoo.net

Venture Hacks — Half-Assed Startup: How do I start my company and keep my day job?

Tags: entrepreneurship, tips, part-time, bootstrapping on 2008-05-21 and saved by5 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromventurehacks.com

9 Ways To Jumpstart Your Writing Goal

Tags: writing, tips on 2008-05-20 and saved by3 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromwww.dumblittleman.com

20 Websites That Made Me A Better Web Developer | Six Revisions : Web Development and Design

Tags: web, design, tips on 2008-05-20 and saved by59 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromsixrevisions.com

Escape from Cubicle Nation: Perfectionists are losers

Tags: entrepreneurship, tips, perfectionism on 2008-05-20 -All Annotations (0) -About

Freebase: an open, shared database of the world's knowledge

Tags: web, database, data, entrepreneurship, tips on 2008-05-16 and saved by102 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromwww.freebase.com

Justin.tv - Mike Arrington Founder, TechCrunch talks at startup school 2008 - HackerTV - Live Streaming Video

Tags: entrepreneurship, tips on 2008-04-21 -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromwww.justin.tv

Justin.tv - DHH Talk - Startup School 2008 - HackerTV - Live Streaming Video

Tags: entrepreneurship, tips, startup, 37signals on 2008-04-21 and saved by9 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromwww.justin.tv

15Expand

You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

Tags: entrepreneurship, tips on 2008-04-13 and saved by22 people -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromwww.paulgraham.com

Humans
also seem designed to work in groups, and what I've read about
hunter-gatherers accords with research on organizations and my own
experience to suggest roughly what the ideal size is: groups of 8
work well; by 20 they're getting hard to manage; and a group of 50
is really unwieldy.
Which means for a group of 10 managers to work
together as if they were simply a group of 10 individuals, the group
working for each manager would have to work as if they were a single
person—the workers and manager would each share only one
person's worth of freedom between them.
And when you propagate that constraint, the result is that
each person gets freedom of action in inverse proportion to the
size of the entire tree.
A group of 10 people within a large organization is a kind of fake
tribe. The number of people you interact with is about right. But
something is missing: individual initiative. Tribes of hunter-gatherers
have more freedom. The leaders have a little more power than other
members of the tribe, but they don't generally tell them what to
do and when the way a boss can.
It's not your boss's fault. The real problem is that in the group
above you in the hierarchy, your entire group is one virtual person.
Your boss is just the way that constraint is imparted to you.
It's the same with work. The average MIT graduate wants to work
at Google or Microsoft, because it's a recognized brand, it's safe,
and they'll get paid a good salary right away. It's the job
equivalent of the pizza they had for lunch. The drawbacks will
only become apparent later, and then only in a vague sense of
malaise.
The restrictiveness of big company jobs is particularly hard on
programmers, because the essence of programming is to build new
things. Sales people make much the same pitches every day; support
people answer much the same questions; but once you've written a
piece of code you don't need to write it again. So a programmer
working as programmers are meant to is always making new things.
And when you're part of an organization whose structure gives each
person freedom in inverse proportion to the size of the tree, you're
going to face resistance when you do something new.
An obstacle downstream propagates upstream. If you're not allowed
to implement new ideas, you stop having them. And vice versa: when
you can do whatever you want, you have more ideas about what to do.
So working for yourself makes your brain more powerful in the same
way a low-restriction exhaust system makes an engine more powerful.
You can adjust the amount of freedom you get by scaling the size
of company you work for. If you start the company, you'll have the
most freedom. If you become one of the first 10 employees you'll
have almost as much freedom as the founders. Even a company with
100 people will feel different from one with 1000.
Or rather, a large organization could only avoid slowing down if
they avoided tree structure. And since human nature limits the
size of group that can work together, the only way I can imagine
for larger groups to avoid tree structure would be to have no
structure: to have each group actually be independent, and to work
together the way components of a market economy do.
There is one thing companies can do short of structuring themselves
as sponges: they can stay small. If I'm right, then it really
pays to keep a company as small as it can be at every stage.
Particularly a technology company. Which means it's doubly important
to hire the best people. Mediocre hires hurt you twice: they get
less done, but they also make you big, because you need more of
them to solve a given problem.
The reason I suggested college graduates not start startups immediately
was that I felt most would fail. And they will. But ambitious
programmers are better off doing their own thing and failing than
going to work at a big company. Certainly they'll learn more. They
might even be better off financially. A lot of people in their
early twenties get into debt, because their expenses grow even
faster than the salary that seemed so high when they left school.
At least if you start a startup and fail your net worth will be
zero rather than negative.
The people who come to us from big companies often seem kind of
conservative. It's hard to say how much is because big companies
made them that way, and how much is the natural conservatism that
made them work for the big companies in the first place. But
certainly a large part of it is learned. I know because I've seen
it burn off.
Founders arriving
at Y Combinator often have the downtrodden air of refugees. Three
months later they're transformed: they have so much more
confidence
that they seem as if they've grown several inches taller.
[4]
Strange as this sounds, they seem both more worried and happier at the same
time. Which is exactly how I'd describe the way lions seem in the
wild.
Watching employees get transformed into founders makes it clear
that the difference between the two is due mostly to environment—and
in particular that the environment in big companies is toxic to
programmers. In the first couple weeks of working on their own
startup they seem to come to life, because finally they're working
the way people are meant to.

Daniel Jomphe's Bookmarks tagged tips → View Popular

How To Demo Your Startup (Part Two)

How To Demo Your Startup

Y Combinator To Offer Standardized Funding Legal Docs

Stevey's Blog Rants: Done, and Gets Things Smart

Yahoo!'s Latest Performance Breakthroughs (Yahoo! Developer Network blog)

Venture Hacks — Half-Assed Startup: How do I start my company and keep my day job?

9 Ways To Jumpstart Your Writing Goal

20 Websites That Made Me A Better Web Developer | Six Revisions : Web Development and Design

Escape from Cubicle Nation: Perfectionists are losers

Freebase: an open, shared database of the world's knowledge

Justin.tv - Mike Arrington Founder, TechCrunch talks at startup school 2008 - HackerTV - Live Streaming Video

Justin.tv - DHH Talk - Startup School 2008 - HackerTV - Live Streaming Video

You Weren't Meant to Have a Boss

Submit A Business Plan

6.001 Fall 2007: Don't Panic Manual

36 Startup Tips

Seth's Blog: How to be a great receptionist

Plazes Simplifies: Lessons From Twitter

Technomadic » Integration is the Sincerest Form of Flattery

Deriving your demand curve using exchange rate fluctuations - Joel on Software

Daniel Jomphe's Related Tags

See More Top Contributors

Related Groups on Diigo

Diigo - Highlight and Share the Web!