RSS
Thinking Small like Paul by Dave Hoover.
Not categorized. Tagged with paul_graham and small_companies.Paul Graham's essays inspire me. I suppose this is because I already agree with most of them and he's just showing me how to construct arguments for the ideas that I unknowingly held. One of Paul's common themes is the "great hacker" which resonates strongly with me because I aspire to become one of those people (referred to in this book as "master craftsman"). The theme that has a stronger influence on me is Paul's take on wealth and risk. Paul points to the special powers and leverage that programmers can wield to generate wealth under the right conditions. His arguments on wealth and risk helped steer me toward a local, three-man consultancy rather than an enormous multi-national bank when I left ThoughtWorks in 2006. Choosing Obtiva was one of the better decisions I have ever made.
Paul's most recent essay is not about wealth or great hackers, but the related topic of company size. Again, it resonated with me because I generally despise working in large organizations. As someone who loves to create things, the constraints and layers of most large companies kill my soul. And even if the large(ish) company (thinking of ThoughtWorks) has a hacker-friendly culture, there is nothing so thrilling to me as working in a very small company, simultaneously creating a culture and software systems of my own design. Paul's experiences running his startup incubator has shaped his ideas about how inexperienced yet talented programmers should start their careers. He advises people to err on the side of joining or founding a small company rather than joining a Google or a Microsoft for a few years to "learn the ropes". As long as you can pay your bills without going into debt, I think Paul is right on target. For programmers, learning is our fundamental activity, and there is no better way to learn than in the context of a small group of people working together to create something. Spending a few years at a Google or a Microsoft will certainly teach you a lot, but some of it will be non-technical and company-specific and therefore useless once you move on. I agree with Paul that those years would generally be better spent in a small company or your own startup where you have the leverage and leanness to optimize your learning experience and help you reach the next level of software craftsmanship.
Michael Hunger said
"... but some of it will be non-technical and company-specific and therefore useless once you move on. "
This is valid for all companies and domains (and especially universities). But while learning this specific stuff we also discover a lot about the abstractions that lie behind it and the methods of learning.
I don't know if you have the leverage to optimize your learning at a startup where slack is not that abundant as you try to get things done. A company that provides the means and time to practise and learn during worktime is certainly quite helpful and can cope much better with the different skills available.
Michael
Michael Hunger said
sl805e said
As someone who has worked for a company during their start-up phase and on into their operational phase I have the following comments:
The 2 phases were very different, with very good reason. Initially that "hacker-friendy culture" exisited but once we had paying customers on the books we needed the process and control to ensure that service was not interruped.
I manged to deal with both scenarios and learnt a huge amount from each.
So when I hear someone say that they are the type "who loves to create things, the constraints and layers of most large companies kill my soul" I get a bit concerned. It is possible to learn a huge amount at a large organisation even taking into account the processes and procedures that will be in place. I accept that there are times when these processes and procedures can seem to be overly restrictive and indeed this has been a contributing factor in me leaving a previous position. This however doesn't mean that working for large organisation can not worthwhile.
I suspect many of us have met people with this attitude. My experience is that, even in a small organisation, this attitude can cause issues. It very often translates to "I know better than you". In most cases this turns out not to be true.
When you say that you like to build "software systems of my own design" what I hear is someone saying that they are not open to ideas from others, not willing to work as part of a team, not aware of the impact that their work has on other people.
People with this attitude are absolutely more suited to a small organisation but by turning your back on large organisations you are not turning yourself into a well rounded software professional.
Dave Hoover said
sl805e, these are very good points. If I have an achilles heel, it is my disdain for large organizations. I wholeheartedly agree that learning opportunities can be found in every situation, even in situations I would rather avoid.
I understand your concern for my "soul-killing" comment and how that often coincides with the trait of "I know better than you". I'm hoping that's not the case for me, though I'm sure I've been guilty of that tendency at times. I should have stuck with the positive side of the statement: I love to create things, and in my experience, working for small companies on small teams facilitates this. I also understand why you could take my "software systems of my own design" comment as sounding like a prima dona, someone who can't possibly be bothered with the contributions of the pitiful mortals who stumble around in ignorance. But consider the context of this blog, please read some of the patterns to get a sense of where I'm coming from. I have left you with the wrong impression of me if you think I am not open to ideas from others or not interested in teamwork.
eno said
As another person who has worked in several startups as a contractor (and now works full-time for a company owned by a large corporation), I would also have to say that it doesn't automatically follow that startups have great examples of good teamwork, super creativity or informed management. In fact, in my experience, it has often turned out to be the opposite (or at best, a mixed bag). True, an individual in a startup often has an opportunity to learn many things (wearing many hats) and maybe even shine, BUT if any component of the startup (be it technical, managerial, etc) is dysfunctional then it can be a pretty bad place to be.
Are big corporations bad?
Short answer: Sometimes. Maybe. Depends.
Long answer: I would say that while its true large corporations often do have the mind-numbing soul-destroying conventions attributed to them, they are sometimes great places to learn good responsible practices that will make you a better craftsman. It depends on the company. Having spent 7 months carefully looking (including interviewing at some very well known companies), I now work for a "regular" small company but the management and technical team here are excellent. We dont have cubicles. People are respected. Communications are good. It can be fun. Im working on a project that is a "startup" idea but inside an existing business. I feel Im in a good creative place where our ideas are encouraged and heard.
So, part of a craftman's journey should include stints in all types of companies large and small, and in all types of positions and then deciding which part to focus on for a rewarding career.
Dave Hoover said