,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
I’ve been thinking about the highest-leverage activities of startup CTOs, and how they differ substantially from non-startups.
Specifically, I’m thinking about both software/systems architecture and related build vs buy choices, compared with recruiting and hiring.
Specifically, I’m thinking about both software/systems architecture and related build vs buy choices, compared with recruiting and hiring.
If you have a company with an established tech stack that you’re not throwing away wholesale, then the highest-leverage activities of a CTO are almost certainly around talent: retention and hiring.
But where you are truly starting from scratch, this may not be the case.
But where you are truly starting from scratch, this may not be the case.
You can make architectural choices that make the number of people you need smaller—sometimes much smaller.
Most people agree with this on some criteria (e.g, don’t need people to build servers if you use the cloud), but most also don’t take it nearly as far as is possible.
Most people agree with this on some criteria (e.g, don’t need people to build servers if you use the cloud), but most also don’t take it nearly as far as is possible.
And taking it as far as possible gives you the highest leverage. The payoff is enormous. If the potential of technology X is to dramatically reduce the number of a certain type of employee, then it’s almost certainly worth seeing if you can hit that potential.
But very few people actually do this. Most startup CTOs I meet are much more focused on the talent side, and then end up with an immediate reliance on multiple teams (devops, front end, back end, database, data science), and none of them think about leveraged architecture either.
By the way, this idea is in no way mine. The first write-up I read about it (and it’s even more true now than in 2014 when @gerstenzang wrote it): a16z.com/2014/07/30/the…
