Why you should, and shouldn’t, join a startup

> If you’re seriously considering both options — a traditional company and a startup — here are some points to consider.

There are so many definitions of "startup", but given the common one of "VC funded trying to get big", I'd say there's a third company type between these two I dub a "starting-up". It's an early traditional company that's in the black but is not poised to go through the roof or become bloated with employees or ask a ton of its employees. Almost like a lifestyle business. Maybe it has tiny investment, but definitely not big startup monies. It has half of each including the bad (bad mgmt, unlikely riches, few benefits, etc) and the good (bit more stability, no overwork, etc).

Maybe it's seen as a startup or traditional by most, but I see them as a really comfortable niche. You get to work on side projects, go home (or work from home) with decent hours, and just relax. Often if small/early enough, if they do strike it rich, you're included.

It's funny how my experience is exactly reverse. Since I joined startup I learn much less, since we can't afford experimentation and there are no other front end devs here, so I don't get a chance to learn backend stuff, since someone has to do front end part.

I also hoped to learn some business stuff, but most of it happens behind closed doors between founders and investors while you code boring crud application.

One thing that seems to be very common in startups is nepotism. People often start companies with their friends and family. This leads to the company having a built-in clique. If you are an "off-the-street" hire, meaning someone who came in because they submitted a resume and not because they knew someone, expect that you're going to be second-guessed while the original people are going to love each other's ideas.

"Why join a startup #1: Acccess to jobs you're unqualified for"

Had a good laugh at this, because it's completely true in my case. 7 years ago became the "data scientist" at a 4-person startup before I even knew what a data scientist actually does. Parlayed that into further data science jobs at somewhat bigger startups. Now I'm Head of Data Science at a stable traditional tech company making good money and this likely wouldn't have been possible without that first startup job.

>But when you compare it to the defined structure of an established company, it just doesn’t compare. Big companies have employee onboarding, management training, goal setting they’ve been doing for years — all of the things that give people guidance and mentorship on what they need to do to be successful.

Goal setting, training, onboarding... these are processes, process doesn't make good management. The problems with startups is many of them are filled with employees who have had little experience outside of that company. Good managers are created with experience. Experiencing good and bad managers and employees in a few different environments is what creates good managers. Not HR policy.

It is a good idea for your career to work in a few places for a few years a piece before starting a new business or joining a small startup. Good managers can't be created with policy and training.

A big advantage to working at a BigCo is how it looks on your résume, or the "About Us" page of your own future startup.

I've seen so many hiring managers trip over themselves to hire former FANG employees, without knowing anything else about them. It's like graduating from an ivy league school.

There's also way more networking opportunities at big companies, merely because there's so many more people.

I think it's interesting that the major point is that you will learn a lot, but he also says that you should not expect to be mentored or given any real direction. This is definitely my experience, but it doesn't mean that startups teach you these things, it means that you have to teach yourself these things and you are in an environment where you are forced to do it.

You can also do this and keep your day job if you start your own side project. Obviously it might not be an intense as joining a small startup, but you get to keep your day job pay. Self-motivation is a requirement though.

There's an important implied point that isn't really talked about in this article: the points about learning in startups are mostly only true if you are a founder or an early employee. The definition of "early" depends on the eventual size of the company.

If you are employee #10 and the company grows to 500, you will have learned a ton from the journey. But if you are employee #100, likely not much actually changes for you, and if you join as employee #500, you likely won't learn much from the journey to 1000, if your company makes it to 1000.

After spending a bunch of years in startup land without seeing great success, I still learned a ton as a founder/early employee though, and I absolutely don't regret doing it. However, I've concluded that if you're looking at opportunities to be a mid-late employee, either make sure you're paid well for it, or go to a big company.

Good points.

You'll end up in chaotic work environments, but you'll learn so much, especially how to solve the problems that arise with these environments.

These are the skills you need for your own startup.

If you "just need a job to pay the rent" it probably isn't for you.

I think the argument about existing at the extremes probably applies here. If I am going to work for an unreliable, unknown, unstable company, I'd rather own a big chunk and have serious skin in the game and control of my destiny. If not, give me the most well funded, monopolized, cushy job possible where I can accept that my agency is a small price to pay for very high standard of living. Applies to apartments too (live in a giant building downtown, for the benefits, or in the middle of nowhere, but not in the suburbs where you are lose-lose).