Bashny.Net
Paul Graham: The high-tech company
Bashny.Net
Original - The High-Res Society , December 2008
High-tech Company
(for the translation thank fantom) i>
For most of human history, the success of the Company is determined by its ability to create a large organization, discipline subordinates. Won by those who relied on the reduction of costs due to the growth of production, which means that the largest organizations were the most successful.
Today everything has changed dramatically, and we are already hard to believe that just a few decades ago, large organizations have strived to be the wave of progress. In 1960, an ambitious college graduate wanted to work in the huge, gleaming offices of "Ford" or "General Electric", or NASA. Small business means small. Small in 1960 did not mean a steep start. This meant shoe store Uncle Sid.
When I was growing up in the 1970s, the idea of "career ladder" was still alive. Standard life plan was to go to a good college, which is finished, you can get an invitation in any organization, and then climb the ladder. More ambitious differed only in that hoped to climb the ladder faster. [1]
But at the end of the XX century something has changed. It turned out that the reduction in costs due to the growth of production was not the only force in the industry. Especially in technology, the advantage of speed, which can be obtained from small organizations, it was superior to the benefits of size.
The future was not as we expected in the 1970s. We thought about the cities covered by a dome, and flying cars, but that did not happen. Fortunately we have the clothing, skills, abilities and specialties. Everything looks so that instead of being in the hands of a few giant, branched organizations, the economy of the future will be a flexible network of small independent units.
Of course, large organizations have not gone away. Most likely, such well-known, successful organization of the Roman army, the East India Company suffered from the conventions and intrigue as the modern companies of the same size. But they were competing with opponents who could not change the rules on the fly, using new technologies. Today, the rule of "win big and disciplined organization" should be supplemented by "in the games where the rules are changing slowly." No one knew about it until the changes have not gained enough speed.
Large organizations lose out, because now they do not get better. Ambitious college graduates today do not want to work for a big company. They want to work in the fast-growing startup. And if they are really ambitious, you start out. [2]
This does not mean that large companies will disappear. When they say that startups will succeed, it is understood that the large companies will exist, because a successful startup or himself becomes a large company, or purchasing a large firm. [3] However, large organizations, probably never will play the leading role which they had before the last quarter of the XX century.
Surprisingly, the trend observed so long ceased. As often happens, that usually worked for thousands of years, is reversed?
Millennium race under the slogan "more - the better", left us with a bunch of traditions that today are outdated, but very deeply rooted. This means that a person aspiring to success can review them. It is important to understand exactly what traditions to take, and what can be rejected.
Distribution of small companies started in the world of startups.
Always there have been individual cases, particularly in the US where an ambitious man, and began his business career ladder grew under him; instead of having to start from the bottom and climb up over the years. However, until recently, it was not a typical path that followed only amateurs. Quite by chance that the great industrialists of the XIX century were little educated. As long as their company grows to enormous size, they were mechanics and shopkeepers. It was a social level, which did not take a college graduate would never, if he could avoid it. Before the advent of start-ups and, in particular, the Internet start-ups, for educated people it was very unusual to start a business.
Those eight people who left "Shockley Semiconductor» (Shockley Semiconductor) and founded "Feirchayld Semiconductor» (Fairchild Semiconductor), a fresh start in Silicon Valley, at first did not even try to create a company. They were looking for a company that will take them to work as a group. Then one of the parents of the children presented to the owner of a small investment bank, which offered to fund them if they start their own business. And they began. However, the idea to start his business was alien to them, they were forced to do it. [4]
Safe to assume that almost every graduate of Stanford or Berkeley, who knows how to program at least thinking about the idea of starting a startup. As is the case in the universities of the East Coast and Great Britain. This picture shows the direction in which the world is going.
Of course the Internet start-ups only a small fraction of the world economy. Can the trend observed by their example, to be so powerful?
That's what I think. There is no reason to believe that there is any restriction of growth in this area. Like science, welfare grows recursively (1). Steam power was a tiny part of the British economy, when W was engaged by it. But his invention extends until until captures the entire economy.
The same thing can happen with the Internet. If Internet startups offer ambitious people the best opportunities, then a lot of ambitious people will be engaged, and this small part of the economy razrastёtsya recursively.
Even if the projects related to the Internet, make up a tenth of the economy, they will set the tone. The most dynamic part of the economy always sets the tone throughout, from salaries to the dress code. Not just because it is prestigious, but also because the principles underlying the most dynamic parts of the economy are working.
The trend of the near future, which is worth betting, a network of small autonomous groups, whose individual effectiveness. And the winner will be a society that creates them less obstacles.
Just like during the Industrial Revolution, some societies will be more effective. Born in England, during the lifetime of one generation Industrial Revolution spread throughout Europe and North America. But it does not spread further. This new way of life can take root only where the soil was appropriate. Needed was a vibrant middle class.
A similar social component needed for the transformation that began in Silicon Valley in the 1960s. It originated two new technologies: the production of integrated circuits and the creation of a new type of company, the fastest growing thanks to the introduction of new technologies.
Production of integrated circuits, and quickly spread to other countries. But technology startups - not. Fifty years later, start-ups are common in Silicon Valley, there are some places in the US, and totally alien to the rest of the world.
One of the reasons - perhaps the main reason - the fact that start-ups have not spread as the industrial revolution in their social destructiveness. Having made a lot of changes, the industrial revolution did not affect the principle of "more - the better." On the contrary, she continued it. New industrial companies have adapted to the traditions of the existence of large organizations, military or civil, and it worked perfectly. "Captains of Industry" issued orders "armies of workers," and everyone knew what was expected of them.
Startups go against the foundations of society. They find it difficult to flourish in societies where the price hierarchy and stability, as well as industrialization was difficult to take root in societies in which the merchant class had no power. But by the time the industrial revolution was a number of countries that have passed this stage. But it seems that in the current situation they are not.
(even straight from the tin - Paul Graham: 'Why Y Combinator? ») i>
[1] follows from this model is the fact that in order to earn more, you had to become a leader. This rule is maintained in startups.
[2] There are many reasons why the American car companies are worse than the Japanese, but at least they are superior in one car manufacturer of Japan: US experts have greater choice of options.
[3] Perhaps someday the company will grow into a large income, and not on the number of employees, but so far in this direction, we have gone far.
[4] Lekuer, Christophe "The birth of Silicon Valley", MIT Press, 2006. (Lecuyer, Christophe, Making Silicon Valley, MIT Press, 2006.)
(1) Recursion in a general sense, the inclusion of a substance itself entirely. E. Steam power was a small part of the economy, and then expanded. And steam energy has become the foundation of the economy. (approx. trans.) i>
Thanks to Trevor Blackwell, Paul Buchheit, Jessica Livingston, and Robert Morris for reading drafts of this.
More 107+ articles Paul Graham Habré.
(Who wants to help with the translation - connect) i>
If you are interested to get to Y Combinator, and you close the idea of Graham, write in a personal, I have a couple of pans.
Your startup is ready to apply to Y Combinator?
Source: geektimes.ru/company/neuronspace/blog/263498/
High-tech Company
(for the translation thank fantom) i>
For most of human history, the success of the Company is determined by its ability to create a large organization, discipline subordinates. Won by those who relied on the reduction of costs due to the growth of production, which means that the largest organizations were the most successful.
Today everything has changed dramatically, and we are already hard to believe that just a few decades ago, large organizations have strived to be the wave of progress. In 1960, an ambitious college graduate wanted to work in the huge, gleaming offices of "Ford" or "General Electric", or NASA. Small business means small. Small in 1960 did not mean a steep start. This meant shoe store Uncle Sid.
When I was growing up in the 1970s, the idea of "career ladder" was still alive. Standard life plan was to go to a good college, which is finished, you can get an invitation in any organization, and then climb the ladder. More ambitious differed only in that hoped to climb the ladder faster. [1]
But at the end of the XX century something has changed. It turned out that the reduction in costs due to the growth of production was not the only force in the industry. Especially in technology, the advantage of speed, which can be obtained from small organizations, it was superior to the benefits of size.
The future was not as we expected in the 1970s. We thought about the cities covered by a dome, and flying cars, but that did not happen. Fortunately we have the clothing, skills, abilities and specialties. Everything looks so that instead of being in the hands of a few giant, branched organizations, the economy of the future will be a flexible network of small independent units.
Of course, large organizations have not gone away. Most likely, such well-known, successful organization of the Roman army, the East India Company suffered from the conventions and intrigue as the modern companies of the same size. But they were competing with opponents who could not change the rules on the fly, using new technologies. Today, the rule of "win big and disciplined organization" should be supplemented by "in the games where the rules are changing slowly." No one knew about it until the changes have not gained enough speed.
Large organizations lose out, because now they do not get better. Ambitious college graduates today do not want to work for a big company. They want to work in the fast-growing startup. And if they are really ambitious, you start out. [2]
This does not mean that large companies will disappear. When they say that startups will succeed, it is understood that the large companies will exist, because a successful startup or himself becomes a large company, or purchasing a large firm. [3] However, large organizations, probably never will play the leading role which they had before the last quarter of the XX century.
Surprisingly, the trend observed so long ceased. As often happens, that usually worked for thousands of years, is reversed?
Millennium race under the slogan "more - the better", left us with a bunch of traditions that today are outdated, but very deeply rooted. This means that a person aspiring to success can review them. It is important to understand exactly what traditions to take, and what can be rejected.
Distribution of small companies started in the world of startups.
Always there have been individual cases, particularly in the US where an ambitious man, and began his business career ladder grew under him; instead of having to start from the bottom and climb up over the years. However, until recently, it was not a typical path that followed only amateurs. Quite by chance that the great industrialists of the XIX century were little educated. As long as their company grows to enormous size, they were mechanics and shopkeepers. It was a social level, which did not take a college graduate would never, if he could avoid it. Before the advent of start-ups and, in particular, the Internet start-ups, for educated people it was very unusual to start a business.
Those eight people who left "Shockley Semiconductor» (Shockley Semiconductor) and founded "Feirchayld Semiconductor» (Fairchild Semiconductor), a fresh start in Silicon Valley, at first did not even try to create a company. They were looking for a company that will take them to work as a group. Then one of the parents of the children presented to the owner of a small investment bank, which offered to fund them if they start their own business. And they began. However, the idea to start his business was alien to them, they were forced to do it. [4]
Safe to assume that almost every graduate of Stanford or Berkeley, who knows how to program at least thinking about the idea of starting a startup. As is the case in the universities of the East Coast and Great Britain. This picture shows the direction in which the world is going.
Of course the Internet start-ups only a small fraction of the world economy. Can the trend observed by their example, to be so powerful?
That's what I think. There is no reason to believe that there is any restriction of growth in this area. Like science, welfare grows recursively (1). Steam power was a tiny part of the British economy, when W was engaged by it. But his invention extends until until captures the entire economy.
The same thing can happen with the Internet. If Internet startups offer ambitious people the best opportunities, then a lot of ambitious people will be engaged, and this small part of the economy razrastёtsya recursively.
Even if the projects related to the Internet, make up a tenth of the economy, they will set the tone. The most dynamic part of the economy always sets the tone throughout, from salaries to the dress code. Not just because it is prestigious, but also because the principles underlying the most dynamic parts of the economy are working.
The trend of the near future, which is worth betting, a network of small autonomous groups, whose individual effectiveness. And the winner will be a society that creates them less obstacles.
Just like during the Industrial Revolution, some societies will be more effective. Born in England, during the lifetime of one generation Industrial Revolution spread throughout Europe and North America. But it does not spread further. This new way of life can take root only where the soil was appropriate. Needed was a vibrant middle class.
A similar social component needed for the transformation that began in Silicon Valley in the 1960s. It originated two new technologies: the production of integrated circuits and the creation of a new type of company, the fastest growing thanks to the introduction of new technologies.
Production of integrated circuits, and quickly spread to other countries. But technology startups - not. Fifty years later, start-ups are common in Silicon Valley, there are some places in the US, and totally alien to the rest of the world.
One of the reasons - perhaps the main reason - the fact that start-ups have not spread as the industrial revolution in their social destructiveness. Having made a lot of changes, the industrial revolution did not affect the principle of "more - the better." On the contrary, she continued it. New industrial companies have adapted to the traditions of the existence of large organizations, military or civil, and it worked perfectly. "Captains of Industry" issued orders "armies of workers," and everyone knew what was expected of them.
Startups go against the foundations of society. They find it difficult to flourish in societies where the price hierarchy and stability, as well as industrialization was difficult to take root in societies in which the merchant class had no power. But by the time the industrial revolution was a number of countries that have passed this stage. But it seems that in the current situation they are not.
(even straight from the tin - Paul Graham: 'Why Y Combinator? ») i>
[1] follows from this model is the fact that in order to earn more, you had to become a leader. This rule is maintained in startups.
[2] There are many reasons why the American car companies are worse than the Japanese, but at least they are superior in one car manufacturer of Japan: US experts have greater choice of options.
[3] Perhaps someday the company will grow into a large income, and not on the number of employees, but so far in this direction, we have gone far.
[4] Lekuer, Christophe "The birth of Silicon Valley", MIT Press, 2006. (Lecuyer, Christophe, Making Silicon Valley, MIT Press, 2006.)
(1) Recursion in a general sense, the inclusion of a substance itself entirely. E. Steam power was a small part of the economy, and then expanded. And steam energy has become the foundation of the economy. (approx. trans.) i>
Thanks to Trevor Blackwell, Paul Buchheit, Jessica Livingston, and Robert Morris for reading drafts of this.
More 107+ articles Paul Graham Habré.
(Who wants to help with the translation - connect) i>
If you are interested to get to Y Combinator, and you close the idea of Graham, write in a personal, I have a couple of pans.
Your startup is ready to apply to Y Combinator?
Source: geektimes.ru/company/neuronspace/blog/263498/
Tags
See also
Why our future depends on reading
7 historical misconceptions about the female body
Neil Gaiman: Smart people read fiction
Neil Gaiman:Literate people read fiction
What we know about ourselves ...
"You just do not like him" 12 cruel facts that will have to take
15 colorful Girls Whose highlight conspicuous
10 successful speculation turtles
Cancer has always been with us: the progression of the disease throughout the history of mankind
Religion in gadgets
