I believe one of the biggest challenges of hiring for a startup is recognizing that the person or skill set a business needs today may not be exactly what it needs several years from now. For me, this means hiring should evolve with the business. I would initially take more of a generalist approach, while still bringing in specialists for areas that are especially important to the stability and growth of the company.
Wasserman explains that early-stage startups often benefit from generalists because they can move between responsibilities as the company’s strategy, structure, and needs change (Wasserman, 2013). As the startup matures, however, specialized knowledge becomes increasingly valuable. This approach makes sense to me. Early employees should be comfortable wearing multiple hats and helping wherever necessary. However, I would still want specialists in critical areas, such as accounting and financial analysis, to help ensure the business remains financially healthy and continues growing.
Research supports the broad nature of early startup roles. Due to startups typically beginning with limited resources and less established roles and routines, employees often perform a wider range of activities than employees in larger organizations (Sorenson et al., 2021). As responsibilities continually change, startup employees can essentially develop into generalists. This reinforces why flexibility would be something I value heavily in my earliest hires.
Growth can also create the difficult decision of what to do when an early employee no longer fits the demands of their position. Wasserman discusses how some employees successfully grow from “player” to “coach,” while others struggle as their responsibilities expand (Wasserman, 2013). Personally, I would not immediately replace someone who had been loyal and contributed to building the company. I would first invest in training and give that person an opportunity to grow. If they still could not meet the demands of the position, I would try to move them into another role that better fits their strengths and bring in someone with the necessary experience. This is also why I would be cautious about handing out major titles early. Titles should be earned and clearly necessary rather than used simply to attract someone.
I would also be open to hiring friends or family, but being related to me would never be the qualification. I would need to know their work ethic, experience, abilities, and genuine commitment to the mission. Family involvement can create both benefits and challenges and emphasize the importance of performance criteria when selecting family members for key positions (Firfiray et al., 2018). For example, I would love to have my parents contribute to a future business because they possess relevant skills. My mother has years of administrative and educational leadership experience, while my father is an artist whose abilities could contribute to areas such as marketing.
Ultimately, I believe successful startup hiring requires flexibility. The goal is not simply to hire good people, but to hire the right people for the company’s current stage while preparing for what the business will need next.
References
Firfiray, S., Cruz, C., Neacsu, I., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2018). Is nepotism so bad for family firms? A socioemotional wealth approach. Human Resource Management Review, 28(1), 83–97. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.05.008
Sorenson, O., Dahl, M. S., Canales, R., & Burton, M. D. (2021). Do startup employees earn more in the long run? Organization Science, 32(3), 587–604. doi:10.1287/orsc.2020.1371
Wasserman, N. (2013). The founder’s dilemmas: Anticipating and avoiding the pitfalls that can sink a startup. Princeton University Press.
