Comment by virgilp | Hacker News Reader

Comment by virgilp | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

While I worked for Adobe, one of the executives there (Mark Randall, serial entrepreneur that was "acquired" by the company, awesome guy) launched the "Red box" initiative that eventually become https://www.kickbox.org/. The red box was essentially a "toolbox" that he created on how to build a startup (set of training materials + $1000USD credit card that you could use however you wish), and the purpose was to get enough proof so that you get executive buy-in to continue your idea - if you achieved that, you got the "blue box" (whose content was a "secret" but was essentially custom-tailored support for your project). The entire process banks on the fact that you validate your ideas _without_ involving the Adobe brand, because if you slapped "Adobe" over it of course people and press would get interested. There were some legal caveats here and there (e.g. you couldn't outright lie and claim you were _not_ with Adobe), but I think it is to some extent the closest thing that you can get to "startup within a big company".

I personally got to the blue box - but then I gave up, when I realized that to get it to actually ship I had to sacrifice nights and weekends. Which would have been maybe fine - except that I knew that I didn't get to keep any upside. I had most of the risks of a startup, but very little of the payoff. Great learning process, but for me - it only managed to convince me that I shouldn't try within a corporation, if I want to try I need to actually do it by myself.

>I knew that I didn't get to keep any upside

That does partially answer what is not in the blue box.

“except that I knew that I didn't get to keep any upside. L

Same at my company. They have similar programs but you also don’t get any stake in the outcome and are still controlled by executives who in the end get the credit.

Same for hackathons they tried to organize. The idea quickly turned from fun projects basically into overtime to check off Jura tickets quickly but with the addition of free pizza.

I think leadership in big companies is almost by definition very controlling. They simply can’t let go. It’s against the instincts that got them into their positions.

It is astounding to me how smart, conscientious adults can be manipulated with kindergarten-level tactics.

I dont know if psychopathy (or the whole dark triad?) can be quantitatively measured but I would not be surprised in the least if after the mean value, any % of incremental in psychopathy is way better than its equivalent in IQ to survive and thrive in the corporate world.

Pretty much all company hackathons are just tech debt day

At startups and big companies

If they were honest and called it a "beat down tech debt day" I would probably be keen for that. I am easily swayed by free pizza, and I love cleaning up hard to understand/bug prone code.

That's not necessarily bad so long as everyone is honest about it. Often tech debt and bugs don't get fixed because there isn't enough time or they don't generate revenue. But we developers hate tech debt and bugs. Dedicating a chunk of time specifically fixing these issues that we hate can result in good outcomes.

> I didn't get to keep any upside. I had most of the risks of a startup, but very little of the payoff.

That sounds super exploitative tbh. Using people’s passion and naivety to give you free moonshots.

I agree that an incentive structure is probably needed as a matter of practice (since few people will want to do extra work with zero upside), but I wouldn't call it exploitative.

You're an employee, you work for a guaranteed salary now in return for someone else shouldering the risk. That's the nature of the deal. If you want to share in the upside, you have to share the risk.

It's not like anyone's being forced to do this extra work (unlike, say, game dev, which is exploitative). It's just an option for people who want to tackle interesting projects.

But the company isn't shouldering all the cost/risk.

> I realized that to get it to actually ship I had to sacrifice nights and weekends.

If you have to work nights and weekends, but get none of the benefits for it, you might as well work nights and weekends on your _own_ side project.

> the company isn't shouldering all the cost/risk

It’s paying your salary. Not having a salary, or having a lower and/or unreliable one, is part of the risk of a start-up.

> you might as well work nights and weekends on your _own_ side project

Nights and weekends plus working days. Not just nights and weekends. Start-up means all in. Hobby means just nights and week-ends.

We're talking past each other here, so I'll try to simplify where I'm coming from...

It is exploitative by the company to expect you to work nights and weekends, but then all the possible benefits go to the company. If you're going to do work on your nights and weekends, then do work for yourself, not for a company that won't compensate you for it.

The above has nothing to do with whether or not it's like a startup; it's speaking only to the deal in question being exploitative.

(Side note: I don't have a problem working some nights and the occasional weekend for my job. But it's very rarely expected of me; it tends to happen when I make a commitment to delivering something in a certain timeframe and then it turns out my guess as to how long it would take was wrong. Because I'm flexible, so is my company; if I need to take a half day to help my daughter with something, nobody is going to push back on that. I just wanted to make it clear that I don't consider the occasional night/weekend exploitative automatically... just that the situation described by the OP appeared to be so.)

> It is exploitative by the company to expect you to work nights and weekends, but then all the possible benefits go to the company

We’re disagreeing, not talking past each other. (Which is fine!)

Above-market salaries, bonuses and the promise of promotion (within the company or without) are fair compensation for aggressive work expectations. The upside is sharply capped in comparison with start-ups. But the downside has been practically eliminated. Nobody bemoans investment bankers, who have largely this compensation model.

My understanding was that this person's normal job did not include working nights and weekends. It was the act of taking on the "company side project" that necessitated that extra work.

If the person's job includes working nights and weekend and compensates fairly for it, and they have the option of working on an official side project _instead_ of their normal work, then I agree with your analysis of the situation.

If the person's job does not normally include nights and weekends, and they are compensated based on that, and adding the official side project to their work adds this time with no added benefit, then the company is being exploitative.

At the high level...

- if the side project can be done instead of your normal work, all good

- if the side project is done in addition to your normal work, with no additional compensation, then it's exploitative.

The (implied) benefits you get is that you can work on interesting things, and probably get much more freedom in your day job. Looks very fine to me if done on a voluntary basis.

Reward being tied to risk is only for the little people. One can point at numberous executive compensation packages where they have plenty of exposure to upside, and almost no risk (or even negative risk: a golden parachute if you get pushed out).

Sure, in that sense it’s “fair”. It’s also meaningless, as this example shows most people will not make a really great product if there is no upside for them so they will mail it in. So sure you can try to squeeze your employees but maybe if you gave them some more you would get a smaller percentage of a much bigger pie giving a win win. It’s very unlikely big corporations can do that for the precedence it sets.

> That sounds super exploitative tbh.

It's not, at all. You know very well what you get into, and have every option to get out at any point, with zero downside to your career. You get paid, get to learn a lot, get to experience building a product with basically zero risk for yourself. Why would the company also give you the upside? They put a lot of resources into this program.

Also, it appears that Mark enhanced the program in the meanwhile/ I was one of the early participants. There's more structure now, and there's a "goldbox" that suggests he figured a way to give employees some guaranteed upside.

Just like any other internal hackathon-type event

Is the expectation with the kickbox that you work on your idea in your own time or was there a process to work on it during work hours as well?

In the link[1] virgilp shared it says red box participants get 1000 CHF budget, 20% of working time, and access to experts.

So they want you to prove out your idea with an allocation of one workday per week. I’d bet most people have to add their own nights and weekends to make it successful.

1: https://home.getkickbox.com/

Do note that they appear to have fine-tuned the program. I was one of the early participants - initially the blue box was a "secret" because Mark Randall genuinely didn't know what to put in it. In the meanwhile, the blue box was refined and it appears that a gold box turned up. True to his form, he approached the entire process as an MVP that was evolved & enhanced in time.

Basically, you work it out with your managers/ organization. Getting the resources to do the product is part of the challenge.

Super interesting. Would you mind sharing more about it?

I wouldn't mind, but I don't know what - ask if you have specific questions. There's ample material on https://kickbox.org and https://home.getkickbox.com/ (basically all the contents of the red box, minus the cash), plus it appears one even has access to a "kickbox community" from what I can tell.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com