[HN Gopher] Tiny Teams Playbook
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Tiny Teams Playbook
        
       Author : tilt
       Score  : 49 points
       Date   : 2025-10-08 12:50 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.latent.space)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.latent.space)
        
       | monadoid wrote:
       | `Simple, Boring Tech Stack: shell scripts over k8s, keep code
       | modular`. wut
        
         | hshdhdhehd wrote:
         | I think now k8s is boring and shell scripts exciting.
        
       | klardotsh wrote:
       | The office or otherwise mandatory frequent in person work
       | sessions bit seems pretty at odds with the underlying idea that
       | you're a team focused on actually delivering and building with
       | deep focus. What does commuting a half hour, hour, or more, each
       | way to an office to put my headphones on and zone in, do to
       | achieve any of that? I'm gonna be able to do that more
       | effectively, more focusedly, and at the hours I'm most
       | productive, remotely. The commute is strictly a distraction.
        
         | awalsh128 wrote:
         | Same. I find myself much more productive. I do like coming in
         | every once in awhile for the rapport and cultivating working
         | relationships face to face though.
        
           | klardotsh wrote:
           | Yep, 2-4x onsites together a year to develop human
           | relationships, and otherwise 100% remote, is by far the most
           | effective team arrangement IME. It is especially the most
           | accessible format for people who do not necessarily perform
           | their best work within the typical office hours (9-5, +/-1),
           | who do not want to live in your metro area, or who are
           | distracted by disturbances in their surroundings - or just
           | aren't hardcore extroverts.
           | 
           | Or simply put: if you truly want the best, most focused,
           | highly performing team, an office requirement shrinks your
           | talent pool tremendously for extremely little gain. Do
           | quarterly meetups somewhere and move on, IMO.
        
             | leetrout wrote:
             | Quarterly is a lot, depending on travel distance and
             | whether weekends are needed for travel, for folks with
             | families.
        
         | rhubarbtree wrote:
         | The commute doesn't help you, but working in an office next to
         | your team mates will accelerate your work.
         | 
         | Software development is a team sport and individual
         | productivity is not the same as team productivity.
         | Communication bandwidth in person is much higher when
         | colocated. Startups move fast and higher bandwidth increases
         | velocity, reduces errors, improves quality and team cohesion.
         | 
         | For other situations remote can be "good enough", and has
         | advantages eg bigger recruitment pool or cheaper labour, but in
         | general in person is just going to be a lot faster with higher
         | quality results.
         | 
         | A lot of engineers don't wish this to be true, because wfh is
         | often better for them as individuals, but it is what it is.
        
           | klardotsh wrote:
           | I've worked in plenty of startups (the overwhelming majority
           | of my career, actually) and did not perceive the performance
           | of in-office teams to be significantly better than the remote
           | teams I've been on. The floor is probably lower for remote
           | teams (in that ineffective remote teams are horribly
           | ineffective), but the ceiling is comparable, and the average
           | is (again, in my experience) anywhere from comparable to
           | slightly better, because folks are working the ways+hours
           | they're most effective, not what someone else thinks should
           | be the most effective.
        
           | copperroof wrote:
           | I use this kind of opinion as my idiot bat signal now. It's
           | so obviously untrue when someone starts spouting this
           | nonsense you know they are a very feelings based decision
           | maker.
        
       | weinzierl wrote:
       | _" Almost no meetings: "deep focus" - building instead of talking
       | about building"_
       | 
       | I used to work in an environment with often 8 hours of meetings
       | straight. People had their headsets on while being in meetings
       | and were simultaneously programming and when they heard their
       | name mentioned they tried to say something smart. It was a
       | terribly inefficient way to work.
       | 
       | Then I switched to an environment where we took _" Almost no
       | meetings"_ seriously and it was a tremendous boost. After a year
       | or so I realized that we left a lot of potential efficiency
       | untapped because of lack of communication or miss-communication.
       | 
       | Now I think there must be a middle ground - an optimum of
       | communication for an optimum of efficiency. Teams need to be
       | actively steered to that, just hiring good communicators and
       | hoping for the best is probably not going to work. You need
       | meetings. At least some. And some seemingly inefficient meetings
       | will prevent inefficiency elsewhere.
       | 
       | Everything I wrote above was about highly distributed teams
       | working remotely. The Tiny Teams Playbook has also
       | 
       |  _" In Person: either have an office, or VERY frequent AirBnB
       | hack weeks"_
       | 
       | in it, which changes things quite a bit.
        
         | the_duke wrote:
         | That middle ground for me is what I like to call "proposal
         | driven development".
         | 
         | Ideas, concepts, implementation plans are first written down as
         | a proposal, which is read by others and discussed online.
         | Meetings are only required if there are blockers to resolve, or
         | differences in opinion.
        
       | abuani wrote:
       | This was a very challenging article to read. Not because any of
       | the concepts described, but for the way ideas are thrown around
       | and organized. This looks like it was written by a set of llm
       | agents that were instructed to write an article without a clear
       | outlined, and then the author took what they felt were the best
       | bits and hit publish.
        
       | leetrout wrote:
       | > Camaraderie, speed: Have fun, do retreats, avoid burnout
       | 
       | Or, alternatively, respect personal boundaries and don't force
       | coworkers to have social outings.
       | 
       | I really wish "work is just work" was more popular. There is an
       | empathetic way to do this that isn't just treating people as a
       | number but also not forcing socializing outside of the context of
       | work.
       | 
       | Yes to avoiding burnout. No to thinking a retreat is the answer
       | to that.
        
         | fra wrote:
         | Hacker News formula for startups: no offices, no offsites, no
         | meetings, and no MBAs. If only idiot CEOs and rapacious VCs
         | were listening!
        
           | leetrout wrote:
           | Not quite.
           | 
           | Have an onsite team or have hybrid setups that bring people
           | within geographic areas together. Nothing replaces getting
           | around a physical whiteboard in a physical space.
           | 
           | Context is in the original statement that retreats are a fix
           | for burnout.
        
       | swyx wrote:
       | (i'm the author) thanks for posting OP! here's the youtube full
       | playlist https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQz-
       | PgA1eJw&list=PLcfpQ4tk2k...
       | 
       | more thoughts after about 6 months of stewing with the Tiny Teams
       | idea:
       | 
       | the more work experience I have in tech, the more I see the
       | inverse relationship between size of team and velocity on
       | projects. I think Zuck aside, the race towards 10-20mm comp
       | packages for high velocity AI engineers (both the kind that are
       | very good at using coding agents and the kind that ship AI
       | products) is a direct economic consequence of this very human
       | observation meshed with the reduction in cost of shipping
       | software as long as you have a very good
       | supervisor/prompter/architect to keep things on rails.
       | 
       | I actually think the biggest casualty of this is 1) people with
       | "bullshit jobs" in tech e.g. "product managers" that are actually
       | "project managers" that call in on zoom from their poolside to
       | ask "ok what's your ETA on that?" on their jira board twice a
       | week, and 2) the VC industry since (if you dont pay a ton of cash
       | comp) companies are close to profitable
       | (https://www.swyx.io/cognition) after an initial ramp due to the
       | insane labor leverage. the one-and-done round i think is going to
       | be increasingly common in VC.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-12 23:00 UTC)