Tobi Lütke

I am not a military expert, but it certainly seems that way.

I found that these teams, like I think parceling things into teams that fit that mold, that size is the best as long as you have a clear person who plays a role of editor and someone who kind of

knows what overall needs to be produced, how to make decisions, someone who can be escalated to if two teams disagree on something, and who can help with coordination.

That's basically what we six-week reviews do at the global level, and then I work with lots of others who hold the editing pen in other areas at smaller levels.

I don't know if that specifically answers your question,

But I think what I've found is there's a lot of myths around that really, really are in people's ways.

And I think this is why a lot of scaling of small companies ends up going poorly.

I have a pretty controversial take on this.

I think part of the reason why there's so many myths about teams is because only people who have time to write books are sort of middle managers.

It's not really the people who actually ended up making the difference or having the leadership position that truly end up writing the books.

Whereas usually the books are written by middle managers who ended up being in some industry that was just experiencing rapid growth for extrinsic reasons, like telecom.

Like the telecom industry in the

in the 2000s, like, then for half a century of mega growth, it was like it started out, let's call it 100 million, 100 billion size of industry, went to multiple trillions just because of demand, right?

So if you had a pulse, whatever you were part of grew a lot, probably despite of everything you ever did.

And then people...

make a lot of money, and then retire, and then write a book about their pet theories about how they did it.

And that's what everyone studies in business schools.

And it just is completely independent of what actually matters.

So things like don't micromanage is one of those things.

No, micromanage.