C Players think that they are A Players and believe in only hiring A players. This has been my experience for the past 30+ years. I've worked with people much better than me and much worse than me, and hired many people for startups over that time.
It is a good idea that if you find someone who is smarter than you, then you probably should hire them.
But the whole "we're looking for A players only" crap is the mantra of mediocre companies and in my experience has resulted in really messed up hiring practices (Eg: Amazon passed on someone I know (because I worked with him) was smarter and better at programming than I am... while hiring me. Not that I'm bad.)
The basic root of the problem is, if you think you're an A player then you think you're at the top of the heap. This means you're not actually aware of people enough to know the people who are stronger than you... which means you can't hire people stronger than you.
Also, I've seen really good people be mismanaged to the point where they aren't really contributing what they should. The difference between an A player and a C player is sometimes really silly stuff- like not giving them an office or otherwise constantly interrupting them, or refusing to give them specs, etc.
This pursuit of the best of the best also sends you down rabbit holes of looking for college graduates (only) who come from ivy league schools. There are a lot of people coming out of the Stanford CS department, I believe, that I would not hire. (Can't say for sure, because I'm not in California) But the skills of producing great grades at Stanford are not the same skills that produce great software at a startup. Not that Stanford students are bad, bu that it's not really a metric for success.
However, the "over achiever" "type-A" "A player" types tend to think it is, the conflate conformance in the pursuit of success with quality, and that's not accurate.
Yes, you need hard work to graduate from stanford, that's true, and that's a key element. But you also need innovation and critical thinking, and unfortunately, colleges these days actually undermine that. Generally, anyway, I'm not saying all college graduates are mindless sheep. Just that people who are more independant thinkers are less likely to go to college. Or less likely to have gotten a CS degree. (I was studying physics for instance.)
It is a good idea that if you find someone who is smarter than you, then you probably should hire them.
But the whole "we're looking for A players only" crap is the mantra of mediocre companies and in my experience has resulted in really messed up hiring practices (Eg: Amazon passed on someone I know (because I worked with him) was smarter and better at programming than I am... while hiring me. Not that I'm bad.)
The basic root of the problem is, if you think you're an A player then you think you're at the top of the heap. This means you're not actually aware of people enough to know the people who are stronger than you... which means you can't hire people stronger than you.
Also, I've seen really good people be mismanaged to the point where they aren't really contributing what they should. The difference between an A player and a C player is sometimes really silly stuff- like not giving them an office or otherwise constantly interrupting them, or refusing to give them specs, etc.
This pursuit of the best of the best also sends you down rabbit holes of looking for college graduates (only) who come from ivy league schools. There are a lot of people coming out of the Stanford CS department, I believe, that I would not hire. (Can't say for sure, because I'm not in California) But the skills of producing great grades at Stanford are not the same skills that produce great software at a startup. Not that Stanford students are bad, bu that it's not really a metric for success.
However, the "over achiever" "type-A" "A player" types tend to think it is, the conflate conformance in the pursuit of success with quality, and that's not accurate.
Yes, you need hard work to graduate from stanford, that's true, and that's a key element. But you also need innovation and critical thinking, and unfortunately, colleges these days actually undermine that. Generally, anyway, I'm not saying all college graduates are mindless sheep. Just that people who are more independant thinkers are less likely to go to college. Or less likely to have gotten a CS degree. (I was studying physics for instance.)