Stop Using Silly Job Titles in Startups, Here’s 3 of Them
Innovation is great, but not silliness. Creativity is amazing when it leads to clarity or serves a purpose, but not when it results in confusion.
I don’t mind seeing an interesting position title if it emphasizes a priority for that position. So, I like titles like Growth Hacker, Customer Happiness Manager, or Quality Herder, because they are not ambiguous.
But when a position’s title distorts reality because it doesn’t really mean what it is supposed to mean, then we should stop and wonder.
I recently came across 3 such titles at 3 startups I’ve interacted with, and I’m going to dive through each one to prove the silliness of these position titles.
General Manager
A General Manager (GM) is typically a Business Unit manager, with Profit/Loss responsibilities. A GM is like a CEO of their division, or sometimes of a Group of divisions at large organizations. So why are we using that title in a startup with 45 employees, or at a VC firm where the title involves managing a network of external portfolio company relationships?
In the startup context, the GM is really an Operations manager. They are managing internally a bunch of areas that the CEO wants to offload from her plate. That’s fully understandable. They are like a COO in the making. Perfect. So, why not call that person an Operations Manager? Allow me digress- please don’t put Marketing under Operations. It shows the CEO doesn’t value the importance of marketing.
In the VC company context, that person is really managing the demands of the relationships between the VC firm and the companies they invested in, including lubricating inter-company synergies or facilitating meetings and learnings . So, what’s wrong with Manager, Portfolio Relationships?
Chief of Staff
The Chief of Staff (COS) position takes roots from the Military, an institution that has an organic command-and-control operating model. Every division commander has their chief of staff, and one of the job’s requirements is to “deal productively, successfully and simultaneously with an impressive number of different people”. The White House Chief of Staff is also a famous position (since 1979), described as someone who “typically oversees the actions of the White House staff, manages the president’s schedule, and decides who is allowed to meet with the president.” More recently, very large organizations have borrowed the COS model, as according to this CNNMoney article, they are the “Latest CEO Accessory”. So, the COS would act like a buffer between the CEO and employees or direct-reports, and their job will range from being the CEO’s sounding board for strategic or tactical ideas, to actually implementing certain tasks, big or small.
So, with that backdrop in mind, why would a startup CEO that operates a very nimble organization of 35 employees have a Chief of Staff? I have seen it, and still don’t understand it. A startup CEO needs to have a strong line-up of direct reports, each doing their job within their particular functional responsibility. I can understand the need for a smart administrative assistant, an operations manager, or a CFO to work closely with the CEO, but the Chief of Staff for a small organization seems like overhead or overkill.
Director of Sales and Revenue
This one puzzled me first, then cracked me up when it got clarified. You can call me old school, but as far as I know, the only difference between sales and revenue is in the accounting part. Sales is what you book in orders, and Revenue is when you get paid. That difference depends on your DSO (Days Sales Outstanding), which is the average number of days a company takes to collect revenue after a sale has been made. Basically, it shows how Accounts Receivables are being managed, and it relates to the ability of customers to pay on time.
So, I asked the person that I saw holding this title in this 180-person startup, what is the difference between sales and revenue as far as your job is concerned? The answer surprised me: “sales is a direct sales team and revenue are other products not driven directly by a sales force.”
Let’s interpret that statement by assuming that products “not directly driven by a sales force” are really self-serve web-based products or via a revenue share model with partners. So, I still don’t understand why isn’t this called “sales”?
The only explanation I could come-up with is to realize that startups are brainwashed by VCs who ask- what is your “revenue” model? Maybe that’s why they figured they needed to have a “revenue” job title.
Whether it’s web-based sales, indirect sales, partner sales, affiliate sales, app store sales, a freemium scheme, a revenue share, or some other way to get revenue via a distribution arrangement,- that’s still sales.
Don’t confuse the world
A startup does not have to re-invent everything. A startup needs to know when or what to draw from the body of knowledge that already exists, while they continue to innovate where innovation can make a difference.
If you are a startup, keep in mind that the world outside your company also needs to understand what you are doing.
You sound like a douche.
Can you please elaborate?
I respect and appreciate anonymity, but it would be more helpful and credible if you offer facts or opinions to back-up your claim, just as I did.
Why bother commenting if only to stop the conversation?
Topic doesn’t interest you? Move on. Topic does and agree or not, that’s why we comment.
Ok since you brought it up Operations and Logistics Manager at Uber and City Operations Manager at Hailo. The titles implies Operations, Logistics Leadership etc. When I interviewed what they were really looking for was analysis with a math or science degree from a name brand school . 1-3 years experience.
Statements like we don’t understand why folks with a logistics , fleet management or operations background would even apply kill me.
I love both companies and have used Uber but you have to do better.
So you think “growth hacker” and “customer happiness officer” are not ambiguous but on the other hand you are confused by General Manager and Director of Sales and Revenue? I think you are really stretching here to make a point. You state “A startup does not have to re-invent everything”, yet that is exactly what startups are doing when they play land of make-believe with titles and job roles. Please, all the cutesy titles and self-aggrandizing titles are all hysterically inane and pointless and to your point, confusing.
It is all about context. Their are titles that make sense in tech startups and there are titles that make sense in other industries and stages of company growth. But if you are engaging outside of your little bubbles, it is best to keep to standard fare and minimize the confusion. Job titles need no innovation; let’s save the creative focus for the actual products.
Founder or Co-founder. Done. Nothing more.
To me, you can call them clowns or punks. Both are fine as long as they make a good exit:).
“We are happy to announce that our startup was acquired for $100M in cash by ClownsAgainstCorp, Inc. We believe it’s a great cultural fit – the Chief Operating Clown of PunkMachines.io said in his interview to VentureBait today”
Sounds great, doesn’t it:)?
Good one 😉
Good humor always clarifies any situation!
I agree to keep it simple and straightforward for majority. Here and there are a few outliners who can do whatever they want, not wanting to knock on any other enterprise of course, it´s all tough work!
Anything + “guru” = silly
This is an old thread but can I say this is an issue for start-ups from the moment two people get together under one company. And this is increasingly relevant even for established firms. I for one have been in client, investor, PR/media conversations representing established digital consultancies and with start-ups and have sympathy for an audience trying to establish a meaningful dialogue with inflated CxO titles or adjective-laden ‘bearded-hipster’ monikers (“what will a life-hacker do for me?”). Before trooping out with fancy titles to cater to ego’s what you really need is check of two things – 1. Are you a practitioner (designer, developer, strategist, project manager etc) and 2. Do you ‘do’ and/or ‘manage’ work. Your audience really wants to understand this your title – its an important ‘tag’ about your personal brand (which is more than title). If you are a ‘maverick’ or a ‘product-design-disruption-hell-raiser-thinker’, chances are you want someone else to make that judgement.