"And I can put up with the most common criticism of this kind of role, which is that is one step removed from the execution. You often have to be OK with someone else acting on your ideas."
This was fascinating to me. I started my career in an execution-removed role (consulting) and actively chose to travel towards execution and building (product). However, as I grow into leadership roles, I'm asked to uplevel by moving from Building to Understand and Sell. I find myself reluctant to let go of being a builder to focus on strategy. Do you think that might reflect an immaturity in my mental framework (ie. does seniority always require moving away from building directly), or do you think there's a balance to be found there?
I’m sure there is a balance to be found. I know many senior people that remain builders at heart (though not many that avoid also doing a lot of selling)
I am curious how to connect the dots between this framework and the framework on when best to join a startup. Is this too far-reaching (or not) to conclude that a sustainable startup is one that can afford to / recognizes the need to have all these 3 pillars (Build, Sell, Understand)?
Many startups don’t invest in growth / strategy / strategic finance / etc. until series C (which coincidentally often the best time to join a startup based on your other article). It is the early stage when the focus is primarily on build and sell.
Immediately after I posted this comment, I realized that the founder(s) often play the Understand role early on. To your points, the nature of the startup determines how broad / how big the Understanding functions need to be.
"And I can put up with the most common criticism of this kind of role, which is that is one step removed from the execution. You often have to be OK with someone else acting on your ideas."
This was fascinating to me. I started my career in an execution-removed role (consulting) and actively chose to travel towards execution and building (product). However, as I grow into leadership roles, I'm asked to uplevel by moving from Building to Understand and Sell. I find myself reluctant to let go of being a builder to focus on strategy. Do you think that might reflect an immaturity in my mental framework (ie. does seniority always require moving away from building directly), or do you think there's a balance to be found there?
I’m sure there is a balance to be found. I know many senior people that remain builders at heart (though not many that avoid also doing a lot of selling)
I am curious how to connect the dots between this framework and the framework on when best to join a startup. Is this too far-reaching (or not) to conclude that a sustainable startup is one that can afford to / recognizes the need to have all these 3 pillars (Build, Sell, Understand)?
Many startups don’t invest in growth / strategy / strategic finance / etc. until series C (which coincidentally often the best time to join a startup based on your other article). It is the early stage when the focus is primarily on build and sell.
It's an interesting thought I hadn't reflected on. Off the cuff:
- The early stage the company is the higher % of what everyone is working on is Building
- Pure "Understand" functions emerge later
- The nature of the company determines a lot about the mix they need
Immediately after I posted this comment, I realized that the founder(s) often play the Understand role early on. To your points, the nature of the startup determines how broad / how big the Understanding functions need to be.
Certainly agree on the founder role!