Sacrifice your health and family for your startup? NOT
Maximizing your chance for success means sacrificing health and family.
I emphatically disagree with this statement. I took the approach suggested by the post for 10 years, and if I could, I would not do it again.
Here’s the rub. Can you deal with being in a situation where there’s always more to do than you can handle? Jason pointedly identifies starting / growing a business as that kind of situation. What he fails to show is that not everything that you want to do is worth doing.
Some things are worthier of your time and attention than others. If you focus your energy on working more, you avoid getting better at judging the value of doing the things in front of you, and you don’t practice the art of delegation. In a nutshell, you focus on the inputs, not on the outputs.
It’s the OUTPUTS that matter. The INPUTS are irrelevant. If the only way that you can conceive to get to success is to “sacrifice your health and your family”, then you’re simply mortgaging your future and “success” will taste very bitterly. This approach has high chances of completely ruining your life and doesn’t create “successful entrepreneurs”, it creates monsters who have lost their moral compass.
2 Responses to “Sacrifice your health and family for your startup? NOT”
Comments
Read below or add a comment...
I am doing the sacrifice thing right now in a turn around situation. In my case, the family is grown up, kids at university, wife running her own business, so the growing the family issue is not as relevant. But, the cost is lack of time for exercise – gained 20 lbs, and stress – which contributes to poor quality of life and a constant state of sleep deprivation. One benefit, good moments are truly cherished.
The issue in this case is gross lack of investment in an important business resource, resulting in technology ghettos and no arms and legs in both management and staff ranks. We are addressing this by holding those who run the business accountable for ensuring that they invest in the systems required to keep their business running. One can only earn false profits by underinvesting in infrastructure for so long ….
The worst part of this scenario is the impact on staff. They bear the same burden, and they don’t get the mentoring needed to advance their careers. They can’t perform personal upgrade studying because after they are finished their crazy hours – they are tired, or need to spend time with family.
The need for huge sprints is a fact of life in many organizations, but one cannot maintain sprint conditions for ever. When this situation occurs, the organization deserves to “go away” because it is not self sustaining. Either shareholders are killing the golden goose, or the enterprise has become irrelevant.
Finally, it is the job of the top leaders to step back and think, see the big picture, and guide the teams through the minefield, battle, forest (pick analogy). When a general jumps into the trenches and starts shooting a gun, the battle is lost. That, i believe is the biggest consequence of the leader overloading their agenda. Cut back on a few deliverables or get additional funding – hold the stake holders accountable to provide adequate resources, make sure you have a #1 and #2 subordinate to share the leadership role (and provide succession planning), all to ensure that the leader has time to think and create conditions for success – that’s what the extra pay grade is for.
My 2 bits after 25 years in IT management.
Mike, thanks for your comment! If you fix whatever is broken and turn around the situation at the company, will you and your team get the reward? If so, more power to you. If not, why do it?
Couldn’t agree more regarding generals jumping into battle.