1. 4
  1.  

  2. 5

    I have been on the other end of it, but more “Jerk” and definitely not “Brilliant”. As much as I find some of the article objectionable, I agree with the advice.

    To be equally asinine as the article:

    What should you do with people you treated like founders but now want to demote, as you hire more employees? Fire them. It’s quicker than doing it piecemeal."

    It’s a bit unfair to label people who invest time in the early part of the company as jerks, because they don’t agree with the direction that the company is going in. It isn’t often loyalty from the management side that compels entrepreneurs to retain these brilliant jerks, it’s the fact they’ve been working hard for a comparatively low salary.

    I also don’t think it’s fair to characterise the movies of said jerk as ‘maintaining their glory’, when often the desire to grow the company could be similarly labeled as greed. It’s simply name-calling in lieu of empathy.

    Underlying the article is the denial of a demotion – it isn’t the change in size, it’s the change in hierarchy that makes the difference. You begin on the same level as the founders, but as the company grows, they rise, and you sink to the bottom.