Ahhh. So the unspoken piece here is “... and pay them more than anyone else is offering.”
-
-
-
Or the same, but with more autonomy/higher impact/healthier culture.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I have a longer set of thoughts half written on why I don't agree with the OP even if you don't care about developing people, but you seem to have summarized the biggest flaw yourself:https://twitter.com/zackkanter/status/1170741006674907136?s=19 …
-
Here’s the uncropped paragraph, for the counterpoint :)pic.twitter.com/YwCfoYopiN
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Does this also apply to a VC picking a founder? Should you only fund someone who's "done the exact task" of successfully founding a startup company before? And pay an appropriately high valuation for that person?
-
The VC model is driven by power laws. They expect the vast majority to fail and are looking for exceptions. Different than hiring.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Generally agree with the original advice. Generally agree with your point re: overconfidence in assessment. Another variable, though — knowing whether you have an advantage in either systems or in developing people for people to levelup/perform more rapidly than baseline.
-
Agreed. Good point. Another frame for this might be: are you going to be the best in the world at developing talent, or the best in the world at leveraging talent?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If everyone did that though no one would have any experience in the thing you’re trying to hire them for.
-
Yes, a contrarian strategy can't work for everyone by definition.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.