The premise of this is that advice to hire "Hire good people and give them room to do their jobs" is bad because that turns into "hire professional fakers and let them drive the company into the ground".
So, if I get this right, hiring is done by the founder, who is not capable of choosing good people in a sea of fakers, and because of founders incompetency the advice is bad?
I do agree that every founder/CEO should have a tool for gauging how their company is behaving out of their bubble, but I see this new mode as a dangerous proposition which will invite all sorts of paranoid founders/managers to take micromanaging/abuse to a whole new level.
Maybe a better question founders(VCs) should be asking themselves is why are there so many "professional fakers" in top/middle level positions, instead of figuring out how to augment their behavior?
In my third world country, when they do something unethical they say "everything is in accordance with the law", here it's "this is on me", both are very cynical.
From the time they went private, it was apparent that this company is unethical to say the least. Given what it is building, this can be very dangerous, but I think they are more proficient in creating hype, than actually coming up with something meaningful.
So, if I get this right, hiring is done by the founder, who is not capable of choosing good people in a sea of fakers, and because of founders incompetency the advice is bad?
I do agree that every founder/CEO should have a tool for gauging how their company is behaving out of their bubble, but I see this new mode as a dangerous proposition which will invite all sorts of paranoid founders/managers to take micromanaging/abuse to a whole new level.
Maybe a better question founders(VCs) should be asking themselves is why are there so many "professional fakers" in top/middle level positions, instead of figuring out how to augment their behavior?