Building a framework for hiring a founding team
By Sarah Andrabi
About this collection
As we were getting started, I researched the best practices and non-obvious things to look for in hiring our founding team. This collection curates key content that shaped our hiring framework focused on **velocity, quality, and cultural fit**. Core insights: - **Small teams win**: Patrick Collison advocates for 2-10 people pre-PMF to maintain rapid iteration - **Barrels vs Ammunition**: Keith Rabois's framework for identifying rare, high-impact contributors who execute end-to-end - **See people clearly**: Graham Duncan emphasizes references are 5-10x more valuable than interviews—what people say vs. how they actually operate daily - **T-shaped talent**: Deep expertise in one area, competent across many—perfect for startup ambiguity - **Prevent mediocrity**: Ben Horowitz warns organizations naturally drift toward average without safeguards My favorite tactic: **the anti-pitch**. Tell candidates why they SHOULDN'T join. The right people lean in harder. The collection challenges conventional hiring wisdom with actionable frameworks for building exceptional founding teams. **Have questions about these frameworks or how to apply them? Ask this curated collection.**
Curated Sources
On Building a Founding Team - by Ben Lang - next play
The article provides tactical advice for founders and candidates on building a founding team for startups. It emphasizes the importance of hiring the right people, with a focus on persistence, risk tolerance, and T-shaped skills. The guide covers how to identify great candidates, where to find them, and how to pitch to them. It also discusses the importance of trust, honesty, and clear communication in the hiring process. The article suggests using work trials, personality tests, and references to assess a candidate's fit. It concludes by highlighting the need for founders to be cautious and rigorous in their hiring decisions, as the wrong hire can be detrimental to the startup's success.
Key Takeaways
- Founding teams should prioritize hiring individuals with persistence and risk tolerance, as these traits are crucial for navigating the ups and downs of a startup.
- T-shaped individuals, who possess both deep expertise and broad competency, are particularly valuable for founding teams.
- A rigorous assessment process, including work trials and references, can help identify the right candidates for a founding team.
- Founders should be honest and transparent when pitching to potential team members, highlighting the unique opportunities and challenges of joining a startup.
What's going on here, with this human? - Graham Duncan Blog
The essay discusses the importance of understanding people clearly in hiring decisions, drawing from the author's 25 years of experience in assessing candidates. It emphasizes the need to see beyond surface-level traits and to understand the complexities of human behavior, using various personality assessments and interview techniques. The author shares their own experiences with different assessment tools, such as Myers-Briggs, Big Five, and Enneagram, and provides practical advice on conducting effective interviews and reference checks. The essay also highlights the significance of context in evaluating candidates and the importance of believing in the people you hire.
Key Takeaways
- Effective hiring requires a deep understanding of human behavior and the ability to see beyond surface-level traits.
- Using multiple personality assessments and interview techniques can provide a more comprehensive understanding of a candidate.
- Conducting thorough reference checks is crucial in making informed hiring decisions.
- Context plays a significant role in evaluating candidates, and understanding the 'water' in which they operate is essential.
- Believing in the people you hire and creating a positive feedback loop can be a powerful tool in their development.
Patrick Collison explains what most startups get wrong pre-product/market fit
Patrick Collison discusses common mistakes startups make before achieving product/market fit, emphasizing the importance of iteration speed and strategic hiring. He suggests that startups should focus on tightening their feedback cycle with initial users and avoid hiring too many people, as the cost of hiring isn't linear but rather quadratic due to increased communication complexity. Collison recommends keeping the team small, between 2 and 10 people, to maintain responsiveness and speed. He prioritizes hiring people who can help build the product quickly. The insights are derived from a Y Combinator talk by Collison in October 2018.
Key Takeaways
- Startups should prioritize speed of iteration and responsiveness to user feedback before achieving product/market fit.
- Hiring too many people can decrease a startup's responsiveness due to increased team management complexity.
- The optimal team size for early-stage startups is between 2 and 10 people, depending on the product being built.
- Strategic hiring focused on product development is crucial for maintaining speed and responsiveness in early-stage startups.
Keith Rabois: “The velocity of your company improves by adding barrels”
Keith Rabois shares his 'Barrels and Ammunition' framework for building effective teams, arguing that adding 'barrels' - extremely talented individuals who can take ideas from inception to fully shipped product - is key to improving a company's velocity. He contrasts 'barrels' with 'ammunition', ordinary employees who don't significantly impact the company's throughput. Rabois emphasizes that true 'barrels' are rare and difficult to find, and companies should incentivize and retain them with equity, promotions, and other benefits. The framework is based on the idea that adding 'barrels' can exponentially increase a company's productivity, whereas adding 'ammunition' has limited impact.
Key Takeaways
- The 'Barrels and Ammunition' framework highlights the importance of identifying and retaining exceptional talent in driving company growth and velocity.
- Companies should prioritize acquiring and incentivizing 'barrels' - individuals who can take ideas from conception to completion - as they have a disproportionate impact on productivity.
- The rarity and cultural specificity of 'barrels' make them challenging to find and retain, requiring companies to offer significant incentives and tailored approaches.
The Law of Crappy People (and What to Do About It)
Venture capitalist Ben Horowitz explains 'The Law of Crappy People,' a phenomenon where teams in large organizations converge at the point of mediocrity. He suggests that employees benchmark themselves against the worst performer at the next level, leading to a convergence of talent at that level. Horowitz proposes a solution involving clear definitions of responsibilities and skills required for each level, along with a 'promotions council' to review promotions. This approach is likened to a karate dojo, where advancement is based on demonstrated skill rather than subjective judgment. The article discusses how organizations can avoid the tendency towards mediocrity by implementing a fair and transparent promotion process.
Key Takeaways
- Organizations can avoid mediocrity by implementing clear definitions of responsibilities and required skills for each level.
- A 'promotions council' can help ensure fairness and transparency in the promotion process.
- The 'Law of Crappy People' phenomenon occurs when employees benchmark themselves against the worst performer at the next level, leading to a convergence of talent at that level.
- Ben Horowitz's solution is inspired by the promotion process used in a karate dojo, where advancement is based on demonstrated skill.
- By adopting a more rigorous and transparent promotion process, businesses can combat the tendency towards mediocrity and promote higher-performing teams.
Patrick Collison: Earning Your Stripes [The Knowledge Project Ep. #32]
In this episode of The Knowledge Project, host Shane Parrish interviews Patrick Collison, CEO of Stripe, about his experiences building and scaling the company from two employees to nearly 1,000. They discuss the biggest mistakes made in Stripe's early days, characteristics of ideal new hires, and how Collison evaluates speculative positions within the company. The conversation also touches on Collison's reading habits, the influence of his Irish upbringing on his ability to disagree without taking offense, and the importance of finding the right peer group. Additionally, Collison shares how his decision-making process has evolved over the last five years and the lessons he's learned from scaling Stripe.
Key Takeaways
- Patrick Collison's experiences scaling Stripe offer valuable insights into the importance of adaptability and strategic risk-taking in entrepreneurship.
- The characteristics Collison looks for in new hires highlight the need for cultural fit and contribution to company culture.
- Collison's evolution in decision-making over the last five years demonstrates the importance of continuous learning and improvement in leadership roles.
How not to apply for a job – Signal v. Noise
The post discusses the importance of attention to detail when applying for a job, specifically highlighting the mistakes made by applicants to 37signals. The author emphasizes that spelling the company name and product names correctly is crucial, as it demonstrates attention to detail and professionalism. The post sparked a lively discussion on the importance of accuracy in job applications and the implications of making mistakes.
Key Takeaways
- Attention to detail is crucial in job applications, as it demonstrates professionalism and care.
- Spelling company and product names correctly is essential, as it shows attention to branding and details.
- Making mistakes in a job application can be a deal-breaker, especially when competing with other qualified candidates.
- The discussion highlights the importance of accuracy and attention to detail in professional settings.
Frequently Asked Questions
- How can we operationalize Keith Rabois's 'barrels vs ammunition' framework into specific interview questions and evaluation criteria for our founding team roles?
- What specific mechanisms from Ben Horowitz's 'Law of Crappy People' should we implement to prevent quality degradation as we scale from 2-10 people?
- How do we balance Patrick Collison's emphasis on 'speed of iteration' with the need to thoroughly evaluate cultural fit and long-term potential in candidates?
- What are the key differences between hiring 'barrels' for product development versus other functions like sales or operations in our early-stage context?
- How can we create 'culturally specific' hiring criteria that reflect our unique company context while avoiding the homogeneity trap?
- What early warning signs should we monitor to know when we're approaching the 'quadratic communication cost' threshold that Collison warns about?
- How do we distinguish between candidates who can 'tighten feedback cycles' versus those who are just technically competent?
- What role should attention to detail (like the 37signals company name example) play in our overall hiring framework, and how do we avoid false negatives?
- How can we implement a 'promotions council' approach for hiring decisions when we're still a small founding team?
- What specific trial projects or case studies could help us identify candidates who can take ideas 'from inception to fully shipped product'?