|
|
|
|
|
by aginn
5029 days ago
|
|
most growth hackers or growth pros are product managers or product editors,so the post starts with the wrong premise. Also, your accusations against growth hackers are titled based rather than what they do or learning about what growth hackers do. If growth hackers choose to identify themselves with each other in a new way, I don't think there is an issue. Let them be. Remember, front-end engineering wasn't considered much of a position 5 years ago. Same with UX, UI, data scientist, etc. How about SEO specialist or direct-marketers.... Can they self-idenitfy a new sub-division of marketing? Adam Smith was right, people specialize as an industry expands to offer greater value in a niche. Growth has become essential to startups. Growth teams are becoming standard at scaling startups. Thus, growth hackers appeared. It is fine to express a distaste for a growth hacker by what he or she does, seems silly to dislike them for their title. That is like saying "I hate chocolate because of they call it "chocolate"" I must say degrading the work Sean Ellis and Andrew Chen have done by comparing them to meaningless consultants from the dot-com era is disgusting. Andrew Chen is one of the most brilliant viral engineers on this planet. Sean Ellis has rocketed several companies to success and just acquired a KISS company. I don't respect ad hominem attacks, neither should you. |
|
I would say exactly the opposite. I expect the average HN reader has tremendous respect for what "growth hackers" DO. But I also think that a lot of the kickback against the term is the perception (justified or not) that it's an unnecessary, vacuous term that (ironically) is "just marketing". Or, IOW, a fluffy title that some people have adopted to make themselves sound more interesting.
If these folks were routinely being called Marketing Strategists or something, I doubt there would be all this discussion about it.