A lot has been on my mind about starting a company lately. What would it do? What would it stand for? What would the ideal situation be? As I've been going through a discovery process, there has been one constant in my mind: I want to create a company with a strong culture. What we do for money is less important to me - a cognizant commitment to the growth of the right culture is the most important aspect of the company.

The happiest I've ever been was NOT when I was making a lot of money, but when I felt like I was part of a small team making a difference. That got me excited to go into work.

To me, the ultimate goal of a company is to serve its employees. It is not to serve its shareholders or customers - customers are the means to the end (and excellent customer service is critical for a company's success). The company should exist to serve its employees to pursue their dreams, not the other way around.

So how do we create this environment? What would the manifestation of this dream be?

To me, acknowledging the uselessness of the 40-hour workweek would be the first step. This tradition is steeped from the Industrial Revolution, where more brainless hours meant more output for the company. How much do information workers actually spend working productively? 20 hours? 30 hours?

Banish the 40 hour workweek: I've always said the biggest shift a company could make would be in switching to a 32-hour work week: work 4 days a week. To me, it's a huge mental change. The work/play ratio goes from 5/2 to 4/3, which is nearly 50:50! How refreshed do you feel on those three day weekends?

The duration of work is important. Having three paid weeks per year of work is insane. I would instead push for the mini-retirement idea from the 4-Hour Workweek. Let employees take 3 weeks off for every 12 weeks of work at a company. They could choose to use this time to pursue a passion project with company resources, or just do whatever they wanted.

I'm not a big fan of paying employees with equity: why create shareholders? Most employees care about cash - and there really is a diminishing return in happiness with an increasing salary - recent studies show $75,000 is the magic number. Nevertheless, if I were to run a  company, I would opt to never issue equity out, but just give employees a fair salary instead (with nice cash bonuses for extraordinary performance). (And without saying, pay above market rates for salaries).

I'm pretty sure the combination of being able to take time off to pursue passions all the time, with the salary to support this lifestyle would keep most employees happy. After going through the start-up experience, I'm just not sure that the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is the right type of incentive.

Posted by roy on February 4, 2011 at 01:13 AM in rykorp | 11 Comments

Related Entries

Want to comment with Tabulas?. Please login.

Comment posted on February 6th, 2011 at 08:18 AM
To your equity point, that's how the CEO of SAS runs his operations as he issues almost no equity to employees. The story goes that 6 of the most senior SAS employees approached the CEO asking to share in the wealth of the company. The CEO told them that he would think about it and tell them the next day. The next day, they came back and the CEO gave them six separate envelopes containing severance packages...
Comment posted on February 8th, 2011 at 01:50 PM
That MBA is coming in handy already!
Comment posted on February 5th, 2011 at 12:47 AM
I think the problem with having a workforce work less than the accepted "normal 5 day work week" is that your productivity has to go up significantly in order for your business to stay competitive. You may not need to be number 1 in your industry, but you obviously want to keep your doors open, especially if the primary goal of the company is to employ people at a healthy wage doing what they want to do.

Amy B (guest)

Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 11:09 AM
I don't care what your company does either, can I work for you??

Jackson (guest)

Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 08:04 AM
I couldn't agree more about the 40-hour week. I'm not as sure about the mini-retirement idea, I like the ROWE concept a bit more: tell me what to do, and I'll do it. Otherwise, I work when (and even where) I want. If I don't do my work, fire me.
Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 10:03 PM
The downside of the ROWE, for me, is that it only works well in situations where jobs are more about individual contributions (the remote aspect, not the results aspect). After what I learned at MT, I'm a huge fan of on-site teamwork - I do not like remote teams very much. I think that forcing in-office hours will yield better results for the team overall.

crb (guest)

Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 04:06 AM
Is rykorp hiring in London?
Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 10:03 PM
I hope so ... someday!
Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 01:55 AM
Sounds good, when can I start?
Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 10:03 PM
I don't need a ballbuster quite yet.
Comment posted on February 4th, 2011 at 10:24 PM
Everyone needs a ballbuster, unless you are the ballbuster....