Good place to work (translation by Ben Horowitz’s article)
For those who do not know: Ben Horovitz - co-founder of the investment company Andreessen Horowitz (with Mark Andressiin). Prior to this, Ben and Mark founded the Loudcloud service - a company that was among the first to provide the Software as a Service. The company was later renamed Opsware and - later - purchased by HP.
It's just another mutherf * ckin 'day for Dre, so I begin like this
No medallions, dreadlocks, or black fists
Just that gangsta glare with the gangsta raps
—Dr. Dre, Let Me Ride
')
At Opsware, I taught a “expectations management” course because I believe in learning. During the training, I explained that I expect from each manager of regular individual meetings with their employees. I even provided instructions on how to conduct individual meetings so that no one has any excuses.
And then one day I learned that one of my managers had not held individual meetings with their employees for six months. And although I used to expect nothing beyond what I can control, I did not expect that. Not a single individual meeting for six months? How did it happen that after all the time I spent on personal training for managers and preparing materials so that the manager would not hold any one-on-one meetings? This is the authority of the CEO! If my managers listen to me like that, why should I even come to work?
I thought that the most correct method of indicating the way to achieve the goals set for the company would be my personal example. The company has already taken all the worst of my habits, it is not clear, why shouldn't they also take at least something good? Have I really lost control of the team? I remembered talking with my father about Tommy Heinson, coach of the Boston Celtics basketball team. Heinson was one of the best coaches in the world, earning the title of “Coach of the Year” and winning two NBA Championships. Despite this, he quickly rolled down and gained the worst reputation in the league. I asked my father: why did this happen. He said: “The players stopped paying attention to his emotional cries. Previously, Heinson shouted at the players, and they reacted to this. Now they just ignore him. ”Has my team really started to ignore me? Maybe I “shouted” too much at them?
The more I thought about it, the better I understood that, even though I told the team “what” to do, I did not quite clearly explain “why” it was necessary. Obviously, my boss's authority was not enough to make the team do what I needed. Because of the huge number of responsibilities and tasks, managers did not have time for everything at once, so they set their own priorities. It is logical that this manager did not consider individual meetings with his employees so important, and I did not explain to him why these meetings are so important.
But why did I force every manager to attend my training? Why did I force each manager to hold individual meetings with his subordinates? After much deliberation, I settled on the main reason, I called the manager’s manager — let's call him Steve — and told him that I should speak with him immediately.
When Steve came to my office I asked him the question: “Steve, what do you think, why did I come to work today?”
Steve: "Ben, what do you mean?"
Me: “Why did I suddenly wake up and pinned up on this job? If I needed money, I could sell this company tomorrow and get more money than I ever wanted. I do not want to be famous, rather the opposite. "
Steve: "Yes, I guess."
I: “So why did I come to work?”
Steve: I don't know
I: “Let me explain to you. I came to work because it is personally important for me that Opsware be a good company. It is important for me that people who spend 12 to 16 hours a day at work, in general, almost all the time that they are awake, are happy. Therefore, I come to work. ”
Steve: OK
I: “Do you know the difference between a good job and a bad one?”
Steve: “Uh, like yes”
Me: "And what's the difference?"
Steve: "Well ..."
I: “Let me explain to you in more detail. In a good organization, people can focus on work and be sure that if they do their work, then it will be good for the company and for them personally. To work for such an organization is a pleasure. Each worker will wake up in the morning, knowing that the work he does will be effective and will benefit both the organizations and him personally. That is what makes their work motivated and meaningful.
On the other hand, in a poor organization, people spend most of their time fighting the barriers within the company in defiance of inactive processes. They don’t even always imagine what their job is, so it’s impossible to say for sure if they are doing it well. In the event that a miracle does occur, and as a result of insane working hours, their work is done, they have no idea what this means for the company or for their career. In addition, when they finally have the courage to tell their superiors how bad things are, the authorities first deny the existence of the problem, then defend their status as the authorities, and then ignore the problem. ”
Steve: OK
I: “Do you know that your manager Tim has not held a single individual meeting with his subordinates over the past six months?”
Steve: No
I: “Now when you are aware, you understand that he doesn’t even have the opportunity to say - does he work in a good organization or in a bad one?”
Steve: Yes
Me: “As a result, both of you are preventing me from achieving my only goal. Both of you have become a barrier to achieving this goal. Therefore, if Tim does not hold an individual meeting with each of his workers in the next 24 hours, I will have nothing left but to dismiss both of you. It's clear?"
Steve: "Absolutely"
Was it necessary?
Perhaps you think that regardless of how well a company is managed, it still will not survive if it does not have a product that the market will like. You may even think that badly managed companies that have a good product will still be successful. In both cases you are right. But then - was there any point in my dramatic presentation and did I need to threaten one of my subordinates?
It seems to me the meaning was - for the following reasons:
- Being a good company is not important if your business goes well, but it may be decisive in the question whether the company will survive or not, if things are not going the way you wanted.
- Things are always not going as well as we would like.
- Being a good company is the goal.
Company Survival
When things go well, there are many reasons to work for a good company:
- Career prospects: when a company grows, many vacant positions appear in it.
- Your friends and relatives consider you a genius, because you worked in “that” company long before everyone knew that this was “that” company.
- Your resume looks much better.
- Oh, and you earn a lot of money, of course.
When things go wrong, all of these reasons cause you to leave. The only reason that can keep an employee from leaving the company is when an employee likes his job.
Things always go wrong
None of the companies in the history of the world could consistently increase the price of their shares. In bad companies, when economic factors stop working, people go to other companies. In technology companies, when workers disappear, a spiral fall begins: the company loses in value, the workers leave better, the company loses even more, and more people leave. Spiral falling is very hard to stop.
Being a good company is the goal.
When I met Bill Campbell, he was president of Intuit, was on Apple's board of directors and was an adviser to many CEOs, including Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos. However, it was not that which seemed impressive to me, but the time when he led a company called GO Corporation . In fact, GO tried to invent the iPhone in 1992. The company received more investment than any other company at that time, squandered almost all the money, after which it was bought for almost nothing by AT & T in 1994.
It probably doesn't sound very impressive. Probably even looks like a complete fiasco. But I talked with dozens of GO employees, including Mike Homer , Danny Shader , Frank Chen and Stratton Sclavos , and what is most interesting is that every GO employee considered his time working for this company as the best time of his working life. It was their best place to work, despite the fact that their careers were stalled, they did not earn money and to top it all became a well-known example of a failed company. GO was a good place to work.
This allowed me to understand how good the CEO was Bill. John Doerr obviously agreed with me because when Scott Cook was looking for the CEO for Intuit, John recommended Bill even though Bill had lost a lot of John’s money at GO. And for many years, everyone who has ever met GO employees understood who Bill was. He made good companies.
If you can't do anything else, be like Bill and make good companies.
PS This translation is experimental and does not pretend to be professional. The author of the translation will be grateful for the errors and inaccuracies of the translation. The original can be found in Ben's blog .
Good place to work
Ben Horowitz
It's just another mutherf * ckin 'day for Dre, so I begin like this
No medallions, dreadlocks, or black fists
Just that gangsta glare with the gangsta raps
—Dr. Dre, Let Me Ride
')
At Opsware, I taught a “expectations management” course because I believe in learning. During the training, I explained that I expect from each manager of regular individual meetings with their employees. I even provided instructions on how to conduct individual meetings so that no one has any excuses.
And then one day I learned that one of my managers had not held individual meetings with their employees for six months. And although I used to expect nothing beyond what I can control, I did not expect that. Not a single individual meeting for six months? How did it happen that after all the time I spent on personal training for managers and preparing materials so that the manager would not hold any one-on-one meetings? This is the authority of the CEO! If my managers listen to me like that, why should I even come to work?
I thought that the most correct method of indicating the way to achieve the goals set for the company would be my personal example. The company has already taken all the worst of my habits, it is not clear, why shouldn't they also take at least something good? Have I really lost control of the team? I remembered talking with my father about Tommy Heinson, coach of the Boston Celtics basketball team. Heinson was one of the best coaches in the world, earning the title of “Coach of the Year” and winning two NBA Championships. Despite this, he quickly rolled down and gained the worst reputation in the league. I asked my father: why did this happen. He said: “The players stopped paying attention to his emotional cries. Previously, Heinson shouted at the players, and they reacted to this. Now they just ignore him. ”Has my team really started to ignore me? Maybe I “shouted” too much at them?
The more I thought about it, the better I understood that, even though I told the team “what” to do, I did not quite clearly explain “why” it was necessary. Obviously, my boss's authority was not enough to make the team do what I needed. Because of the huge number of responsibilities and tasks, managers did not have time for everything at once, so they set their own priorities. It is logical that this manager did not consider individual meetings with his employees so important, and I did not explain to him why these meetings are so important.
But why did I force every manager to attend my training? Why did I force each manager to hold individual meetings with his subordinates? After much deliberation, I settled on the main reason, I called the manager’s manager — let's call him Steve — and told him that I should speak with him immediately.
When Steve came to my office I asked him the question: “Steve, what do you think, why did I come to work today?”
Steve: "Ben, what do you mean?"
Me: “Why did I suddenly wake up and pinned up on this job? If I needed money, I could sell this company tomorrow and get more money than I ever wanted. I do not want to be famous, rather the opposite. "
Steve: "Yes, I guess."
I: “So why did I come to work?”
Steve: I don't know
I: “Let me explain to you. I came to work because it is personally important for me that Opsware be a good company. It is important for me that people who spend 12 to 16 hours a day at work, in general, almost all the time that they are awake, are happy. Therefore, I come to work. ”
Steve: OK
I: “Do you know the difference between a good job and a bad one?”
Steve: “Uh, like yes”
Me: "And what's the difference?"
Steve: "Well ..."
I: “Let me explain to you in more detail. In a good organization, people can focus on work and be sure that if they do their work, then it will be good for the company and for them personally. To work for such an organization is a pleasure. Each worker will wake up in the morning, knowing that the work he does will be effective and will benefit both the organizations and him personally. That is what makes their work motivated and meaningful.
On the other hand, in a poor organization, people spend most of their time fighting the barriers within the company in defiance of inactive processes. They don’t even always imagine what their job is, so it’s impossible to say for sure if they are doing it well. In the event that a miracle does occur, and as a result of insane working hours, their work is done, they have no idea what this means for the company or for their career. In addition, when they finally have the courage to tell their superiors how bad things are, the authorities first deny the existence of the problem, then defend their status as the authorities, and then ignore the problem. ”
Steve: OK
I: “Do you know that your manager Tim has not held a single individual meeting with his subordinates over the past six months?”
Steve: No
I: “Now when you are aware, you understand that he doesn’t even have the opportunity to say - does he work in a good organization or in a bad one?”
Steve: Yes
Me: “As a result, both of you are preventing me from achieving my only goal. Both of you have become a barrier to achieving this goal. Therefore, if Tim does not hold an individual meeting with each of his workers in the next 24 hours, I will have nothing left but to dismiss both of you. It's clear?"
Steve: "Absolutely"
Was it necessary?
Perhaps you think that regardless of how well a company is managed, it still will not survive if it does not have a product that the market will like. You may even think that badly managed companies that have a good product will still be successful. In both cases you are right. But then - was there any point in my dramatic presentation and did I need to threaten one of my subordinates?
It seems to me the meaning was - for the following reasons:
- Being a good company is not important if your business goes well, but it may be decisive in the question whether the company will survive or not, if things are not going the way you wanted.
- Things are always not going as well as we would like.
- Being a good company is the goal.
Company Survival
When things go well, there are many reasons to work for a good company:
- Career prospects: when a company grows, many vacant positions appear in it.
- Your friends and relatives consider you a genius, because you worked in “that” company long before everyone knew that this was “that” company.
- Your resume looks much better.
- Oh, and you earn a lot of money, of course.
When things go wrong, all of these reasons cause you to leave. The only reason that can keep an employee from leaving the company is when an employee likes his job.
Things always go wrong
None of the companies in the history of the world could consistently increase the price of their shares. In bad companies, when economic factors stop working, people go to other companies. In technology companies, when workers disappear, a spiral fall begins: the company loses in value, the workers leave better, the company loses even more, and more people leave. Spiral falling is very hard to stop.
Being a good company is the goal.
When I met Bill Campbell, he was president of Intuit, was on Apple's board of directors and was an adviser to many CEOs, including Steve Jobs and Jeff Bezos. However, it was not that which seemed impressive to me, but the time when he led a company called GO Corporation . In fact, GO tried to invent the iPhone in 1992. The company received more investment than any other company at that time, squandered almost all the money, after which it was bought for almost nothing by AT & T in 1994.
It probably doesn't sound very impressive. Probably even looks like a complete fiasco. But I talked with dozens of GO employees, including Mike Homer , Danny Shader , Frank Chen and Stratton Sclavos , and what is most interesting is that every GO employee considered his time working for this company as the best time of his working life. It was their best place to work, despite the fact that their careers were stalled, they did not earn money and to top it all became a well-known example of a failed company. GO was a good place to work.
This allowed me to understand how good the CEO was Bill. John Doerr obviously agreed with me because when Scott Cook was looking for the CEO for Intuit, John recommended Bill even though Bill had lost a lot of John’s money at GO. And for many years, everyone who has ever met GO employees understood who Bill was. He made good companies.
If you can't do anything else, be like Bill and make good companies.
PS This translation is experimental and does not pretend to be professional. The author of the translation will be grateful for the errors and inaccuracies of the translation. The original can be found in Ben's blog .
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/150401/
All Articles