[HN Gopher] Why it's difficult to build teams in high growth org...
___________________________________________________________________
Why it's difficult to build teams in high growth organisations
Author : absolute100
Score : 30 points
Date : 2021-08-19 20:12 UTC (2 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (jchyip.medium.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (jchyip.medium.com)
| m0llusk wrote:
| Moving fast breaks things.
| absolute100 wrote:
| Jason Yip shares his observations for scaling software teams
| during hyper growth (and what not to do). I liked his insight on
| group structure alignment with the stability of the group's
| strategy: "Structure should be stable where strategy is stable;
| structure should be flexible where strategy is volatile. For
| example, if a broader department-level product strategy is stable
| while more local tactics are volatile, you should want the
| structure and shared identity of the department to be stronger
| and more stable than team-level structures and identities."
| jasonpeacock wrote:
| So...Conway's Law :)
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway%27s_law
|
| There is also the "reverse-Conway maneuver": Structure the org
| to produce the results you want.
| msandford wrote:
| I love the idea of the reverse Conway maneuver. Thanks for
| that. Obvious in hindsight.
| nick0garvey wrote:
| I've worked at both small and large companies in periods of rapid
| growth.
|
| With 2x YoY growth you are always onboarding. You need to be
| multiplicative with your onboarding efforts. This means writing
| quality onboarding documentation, mentoring mentors, and
| codifying parts of the onboarding process (e.g. groups to join,
| permissions, etc.). Making other engineers effective is a very
| valuable use of time when so many people are ramping up at once.
|
| It can feel exhausting, but mostly invigorating. There's always a
| feeling of energy; the hardest part can be setting boundaries to
| not let it consume your free time.
| tibiahurried wrote:
| There is also the fake "high growth". I worked at startup where
| the CEO was growing the organization like crazy, just for the
| sake of showing that the company was growing, even though it
| was not. We were on-boarding engineers almost every day and did
| not have any work for them to do.
|
| I am talking like teams of more than 10 engineers that took
| months to deliver simple features. Most of the engineers were
| spending their time fighting their IDE, local setup and finding
| a purpose.
|
| Best project I worked on, it was in a team of 3 people: manager
| + 2 engineers. I built the whole backend and the other gui the
| frontend stuff. Worked like a charm! We delivered on time and
| things just worked.
|
| Sometime, less is better.
| zemvpferreira wrote:
| Instagram was 13 people when Facebook acquired it for roughly
| 1 billion dollars. It had 30 million users.
|
| Plenty of us have excuses for why our companies are not worth
| 76 million dollars per employee. Some of us don't even try.
| The point is you're right: It doesn't take a lot of people to
| create extraordinary value.
| jasonpeacock wrote:
| The hardest is part is keeping all the onboarding tools, docs,
| etc updated as the product, infrastructure, and process
| changes.
|
| You really need a full-time "onboarding" engineer, or make a
| rotation for everyone to dogfood the onboarding process and
| update it.
|
| Otherwise it falls on the new person to update the process,
| which is both education and frustrating, depending on how busy
| the rest of the teams are.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-08-19 23:00 UTC)