Too Consensus-Oriented
Collison: Between 5 and 50 people, I think we were much too consensus-oriented. We weren't completely consensus-oriented — we couldn't have gotten anything done. But I think we biased too much in that direction. That's a relatively common mistake.
There's no particular need for formal decision-making mechanisms at first. But then you hit 15 people and now there is. Companies don't adjust quickly enough to that new necessity. Very much us included.
Between 5 and 50 people, we were too consensus-oriented. A common mistake.
The Shift at 10 People
Collison: When you hit a certain size — I'll say 10 people for simplicity, maybe a bit before, maybe a bit after — you need to adjust more deliberately to an explicit communication model of being quite firmly non-consensus-based.
Nobody likes the idea of being hierarchical. It sounds pejorative. But in some sense, hierarchical — because those are efficient ways to have shots get called.
At 10 people, you need to shift firmly to non-consensus-based decision making.
The Delicate Balancing Act
Collison: On the one hand, you want to prioritize speed and agility — which involves being somewhat hierarchical. But on the other side, you really do want people to have this strong ownership mentality. A real sense that they can cause things to change, or identify problems, or inject new ideas even in unrelated areas.
It's this delicate act — how do you facilitate enough autonomy, but also not have things devolve? I really wish there was a simple 'just do X, Y, and Z and you'll be good.' If such X, Y's, and Z's exist, no one's told me yet.
How do you facilitate enough autonomy but not have things devolve? If there's a simple answer, nobody's told me.