| That is also what I think is going on. However: >If you're gambling with other people's money, it's in your interest to keep complaining about how hard you're working, and how stressed out you are : It's a positive signal to the people funding you. This assumes that the people who are funding you are primarily evaluating you on how hard you are working, and in this case, that they don't understand the correlation between performance and sleep. Now, I think, in most cases, you are right. >If it's all your own money you're gambling with, complaining about the stress might be taken as indicating you bit off more than you can chew : A negative signal for employees. Hm. I think the "bit off more than you can chew" applies as much to investors as to employees. Also, I've seen many, many middle managers pretend to work harder in an effort to 'lead from the front' and get underlings to work harder. It works; as they say, "it doesn't matter how early you show up, as long as you show up before the boss. It doesn't matter how late you leave, as long as you leave after the boss." But this works on metrics that matter, too, not just on but-in-seat time. My experience has been that if you publish any performance metric, your employees will try to come close[1]. It's kindof irritating, sometimes; I mean, if I wanted to do it, I wouldn't have hired you to do it, right? I need you to pick up the slack precisely when I'm falling down. When I'm doing well? you can slack off a bit. But eh, that seems to be how people work. But those things apply to the people that the workers see as their direct leaders, regardless of ownership structure. I think the primary difference here is that when you work with someone else's money, the goal is to get big, fast, or to die fast. What do they say? Fail early? If you are working with your own money, you usually have less to start with, and because of that you usually are playing a much longer game. (I think that most of the problems with having partners also come out in the 'long game' - to the point where I think a solo founder actually has a advantage in the long game, assuming that he or she has the personal earning power to keep the company in business.) [1]" it was shameful for the chief to be surpassed in valor by his companions; shameful for the companions not to equal the valor of their chief. To survive his fall in battle, was indelible infamy. To protect his person, and to adorn his glory with the trophies of their own exploits, were the most sacred of their duties." Man, I love Gibbon. I mean, on a conscious level, I'm embarrassed to use sweaty combat metaphors, but I do admit that it calls out to something buried deep within the obsolete portions of my hind brain. |