Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by adamredwoods 764 days ago
>> I believe the most capable person for any position isn’t necessarily the person with the most amount of experience. Great companies are built by people with drive and intensity, not by people with years of experience doing the same thing.

Hiring should be based on soft guidelines, not hard lines of gatekeeping. I'm glad some companies are aware of this.

But to state you want people with "drive and intensity" can potentially lead to people with large egos, conflict of goals, and unrealistic expectation of others (which can cause burnout). In worst-case scenarios they get promoted using this "drive" combined with contrived outcomes and over-inflated results. Be prepared for this.

I also wonder, when companies post these mandates, if they are looking for 10x workers, because they need a big win, quickly, for cheap.

3 comments

Drive and intensity can also read as “young person willing to work 14 hours a day plus weekends” vs “older experienced person with a family and who is no longer as willing to sacrifice themselves and their family on the altar of work so some shareholder can make more $$.
Here at CrapCorp, we are looking for intensely driven individuals who will eagerly sacrifice their health and happiness (and, in some cases, their very lives) to bring increased wealth to our executives and shareholders.

For those that do make the ultimate sacrifice, we offer a commemorative "thanks for your effort to increase shareholder value" plaque, which may be displayed with pride at your interment site, or by your next of kin.

I read 'drive and intensity' in a far more nebulous 'passion' that is thrown around by companies to attract true believers who will dedicate 90% of their waking hours to The Mission whatever that may be.
Who doesn’t want a big win, quickly, for cheap?
So cycle through as many workers as possible and just keep the shining stars? Incredibly demoralizing and chaotic.
That would require the ability to recognize and reward excellence, which you don’t see very often. Instead, they tend to go out of their way to try to make everyone feel replaceable and temporary.
I think Microsoft may have tried that. How else could they have created 80 million lines of Microsoft Office code?