Read on Twitter
I will clarify. Businesses are a tool for impact. We get to choose where that impact is directed. For me, if it's directed solely at making some founders rich, we're missing out on some major opportunities. https://twitter.com/natalienagele/status/1308471312592109570
I understand the desire to swing the pendulum in the opposite direction, away from VC-backed firms that over-hire and don't make money. Effectively taking big gambles to make the VCs rich. But revenue per employee often implies the same "make a few folks rich" mentality.
The end goal should not be to optimize the shit out of our teams. We should be optimizing our impact instead.
I think it was @amix3k who once said that maybe Salesforce is a better business because it provides thousands of people with great jobs and awesome benefits.Versus a smaller, highly profitable, bootstrapped company that maximizes profits that go into the founders savings account.
We have 4 constituents in a business: Founders, Employees, Customers and Community. Every decision should be evaluated on how it impact EACH of these constituents. And, in a perfect world, we try to balance the impact.
Founders should be rewarded, and I love when they make money (see pinned tweet). But we don't have to stop there. These amazing, bootstrapped companies you're building. These People-First businesses, they have the ability to have impact on more lives.
Hire more people. Lower your revenue per employee, increase your impact. Every new person adds a ripple effect. You're impacting them, their families, their communities. You have the capacity to make real change, and not just pad your savings account.
