They say “Find something you love and you’ll never work a day in your life”. And it is true that when you do enjoy what you do, time flies and you’re rather unbeatable. You’re hard to compete with, because you’ll put in so much more time, energy and creativity than someone who does it just for the money, or for extrinsic reasons in general.
But they also say “Find something you love and let it kill you”. And this is also true. Passionate people are often even more prone to burnout, as they are less likely to stop when they need to rest and recharge.
I’ve spent most of my adult life oscillating between overachieving (and feeling like everything goes by way too fast to enjoy or even ‘digest’ as I go) and moments of savouring, usually plagued by the guilt of “losing precious time” (I did get way better at taking breaks over the last years, but that’s a different post).
For as long as I can remember, Silicon Valley culture has promoted the idea of the ruthless hustle. We hear things like “Don’t stop when you’re tired, stop when you’re done” or “I’d rather hustle 24/7 than slave 9 to 5”.
Yet, if you look up the meaning of hustle, these are some of the definitions you’ll find:
force (someone) to move hurriedly or unceremoniously in a specified direction
push roughly; jostle. ("they were hissed and hustled as they went in”)
obtain by forceful action or persuasion; coerce or pressure someone into doing or choosing something ("don't be hustled into anything")
sell aggressively
obtain by illicit action; swindle; cheat
Synonyms: bludgeon, bulldoze, steamroller, strong-arm.
But reading through these, I don’t resonate with too much of it. I’m not sure this is how I want my life to feel. Not to mention that an overwhelmingly stressful lifestyle like this takes a toll that holds you back from doing your best work.
In a recent study done on a few thousand people, participants who had high levels of cortisol (the body’s main stress hormone) for prolonged periods did poorer on memory and cognitive tests, and over time, literally lost brain volume. Now, I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a shrunken brain.
Conversely, a more balanced attitude to work has benefits like better mental clarity, a longer attention span, enhanced creativity, better sleep and improved fitness. In short, superior mental and physical health.
As Matt Munson says, in innovation, tech, and generally ‘knowledge work’, "we are not in the business of digging ditches; we are in the business of creatively solving complex problems with constrained resources to drive innovation and growth. That kind of work requires perspective and a rested mind.”
Simply put, the quality of your output is driven by the quality of your judgement and decisions. Which depends on a balanced approach to taking care of your body and mind, the same way you take care of your business. The quality of our decision-making has always mattered, but these days, its importance is multiple-fold compared to 50 or 100 years ago because of the augmented, exponentially increased power of modern technology that serves and implements those decisions.
Which got me thinking about current and alternative approaches, frameworks and new, enhanced terms.
Can we really only build a business by running ourselves to the ground? Aren’t there some options for those of us who crave a more expansive definition of success?
The unicorn model: ultra-rapid expansion & overfertilizing
Historically, the typical startup aspiration, and most sought-after model in the tech world, has been the so-called “unicorn”: a company valued at over a billion dollars, characterized by ultra-rapid growth. This is often fueled by eye-watering rounds after rounds of venture capital investment. The goal is to rapidly increase the company's valuation, aiming for a high-profile IPO (Initial Public Offering, a company's big entrance into the stock market), or for an acquisition. This path, while glorified, glamorous and potentially lucrative, involves significant risks, including high debt (or various forms of it), vulnerability to market fluctuations and overextension.
Not to mention unicorns often serve as excellent fodder for satire and parody, as depicted in pop culture via books like Disrupted and the Silicon Valley series.
Their absurd work environments and over-the-top shenanigans can include:
granting unlimited vacation that everyone, however, feels pressured not to take, choosing to work 80h/week and sleeping at the office instead;
having private chefs, massage rooms and unlimited beer on taps at the office;
dropping millions of dollars on having Lady Gaga perform at a private company event to “celebrate” a milestone, such as raising another round of funding while already being deeply in debt and the making of actual money being nowhere in sight.
The camel model: sustainability & resilience
In contrast, a newer term in entrepreneurship and startups is modelled based on camels rather than unicorns. This approach is akin to how camels survive and thrive in harsh desert environments - by efficiently ‘managing resources’, withstanding adverse conditions (like scorching heat), and adapting to extreme changes. This reminds me of something. Oh, it reminds me of reality, rather than a fantasy world full of unicorns frolicking about.
Camel startups are all about growing steadily and smartly. They focus on setting the right prices and controlling costs, so they don't stretch themselves too thin. They see building a business as a long game, taking their time to grow solidly and consistently (long-term outlook). Plus, they're not putting all their eggs in one basket (diversification) – they tend to dive into different markets right from the start, making them tough enough to handle tough times.
Even if the metaphor isn’t as flashy.
Let’s see a comparison side by side:
Now, let’s look at some examples.
Unicorns:
WeWork: With a peak valuation of $47 billion, WeWork was the poster child for shared workspaces, and rapid growth, until someone took a closer look at the numbers and realized they (the numbers) were more creative than their community art projects. Its failed IPO in 2019 brought to light issues with the business model, leadership, and financial sustainability. The company filed for bankruptcy in November 2023, and managed the exceptional feat of basically turning 22 billion dollars of investor money (raised over 23 rounds of funding!) into… a whole bunch of nothing.
Uber: Founded in 2009, the company revolutionized the transportation industry with its ride-hailing app, which allowed users to book car rides from their smartphones. It then quickly expanded globally, diversifying into areas like food delivery and freight shipping. Uber’s valuation soared as high as $82 billion at the time of its IPO in May 2019. The lesser-known fact is that for many, many years, Uber reported substantial losses, which is a common trait among fast-growing startups prioritizing expansion and growth over profitability. All in all, it took 14 years and nearly $32 billion of cumulative losses, to finally become a profitable company in August 2023. (Side note: this is the hope/dream for those building unicorns, that after accumulating many years of losses, you will “strike big”. The problem is only a small minority does make it to this point)
Theranos: In the hall of fame for Silicon Valley misadventures, Theranos surely takes the cake. Once valued at a cool $9 billion and hailed as the next big thing promising revolutionary blood-testing tech, it was later revealed the technology didn’t, in fact, work as claimed. Elizabeth Holmes, the company's founder, had to swap her Steve-Jobs-inspired black turtleneck for a courtroom suit, facing charges of massive fraud. Theranos, much like its promises, eventually evaporated into nothingness, taking with it roughly a billion dollars of investor money.
As you can see, through their very nature, unicorns - while glamorous and highly desired, are not too infrequently the digital equivalent of a shooting star – you blink, and it's gone, and your money’s gone with it, too.
Reading this (and other news about tech unicorn startups), you may have wondered what happened to building a good ol’ profitable business. Selling a product or a service for money, seeing if people buy it, knowing the value of it, and building a business that way.
In a recent episode of one of my favourite podcasts, Jerry Colona wisely remakes that the right amount of capital, just like the right amount of fertilizer for a plant, at the right time, accelerates growth. Conversely, investors can put capital in a promising young business in a way where capital overfertilizes and overgrows the business to the point where it collapses. That doesn’t help anyone.
Sam Altman (CEO of OpenAI) fittingly says: “Growth solves almost all problems”.
So what problems does it not solve? And what’s the alternative to this madness?
Let’s look at some examples of camels.
I’ll give 5 examples here as opposed to 3 unicorns because I subjectively like them more, but you’ve probably figured that out on your own by this point 😀
Mailchimp: The email marketing equivalent of a fine wine, Mailchimp matured beautifully over two decades without a drop of external funding. Focused on profitable growth, they mixed the perfect blend of resilience and innovation, leading to a toast-worthy acquisition by Intuit in 2021.
Basecamp: A project management and team communication software company, Basecamp has been profitable since its inception in 2004. Like that self-reliant friend who succeeds without ever asking for a dime in loans from FFFs (friends, fools and family). Shunning the venture capital path, Basecamp chose a path less travelled by startups: a sustainable business model and a robust customer base. Making stuff people want to pay the right amount of money for. Imagine that.
Atlassian: the mastermind behind software like Jira and Trello, initially grew without any venture capital funding, too. The company focused on profitability from its early days and had a very successful IPO in 2015.
Patagonia: The camel of the retail world, Patagonia, has been more about 'reduce, reuse, recycle' than 'raise, burn, and IPO.' It has consistently focused on sustainability and environmental responsibility, growing steadily and maintaining profitability over many years.
GitHub: GitHub, before catching Microsoft's eye, was like the indie band of the tech world – bootstrapped (self-funded, growing using existing resources rather than external funding), yet wildly popular with its devoted fans (developers, in this case). They built a business that’s as sturdy as the code repositories it hosts, proving that sometimes, the best investment is a community of loyal users, not a flood of venture dollars.
"There is a difference between moving fast and rushing. You can move fast and be thoughtful. When you rush, you sacrifice thoughtfulness. Conversely, when you are thoughtful but not moving fast, you are overthinking it. Don’t rush, but don’t wait." (James Clear)
This reminded me of the story of the two men who once had to cross the sea. One asked: "Better to row or sail?" The elder replied: "Rowing will be quicker at first. But if we can align ourselves with the winds and currents, sailing will be faster & more enjoyable."
The quickest way to bludgeon your way through may not bring you to your next destination faster than thoughtfulness and steadiness. So consider that for your next venture, project or business. And let me know how it went.
I’ll be over here tending to my camel.
In part 2 of this article, I’ll discuss one more framework or term around non-hustling.
Grateful to
and for their insightful feedback and questions on this topic.