Hank [BS/MSEE,
MSM $$$, Ph.D. Mgmt] teaches Patriots and Mercenaries
February 10, 2008 by Kevin Merritt
When hiring for blist, we look for a trait that I think is akin to being a patriot. These folks demonstrate true passion for a much larger cause. For these wonderful, passionate individuals, their thoughts focus on having huge impact on significant causes. Patriots agonize over the opportunity cost of investing their time in something less than revolutionary.
The opposite trait is the mercenary. They are excellent marksmen and skilled soldiers. It’s natural to think they can fortify the ranks and have impact. But they aren’t interested in bigger-than-self movements. They agonize over how they can have leverage, not impact. Leverage is self-serving. Impact is community serving.
Most companies are filled with both patriots and mercenaries, battling side by side. When a company muddles along, having patriots and mercenaries is fine. But when a company starts to have real, broad, meaningful impact, internal conflicts between patriots and mercenaries inevitably arise. In those rare moments worthy of glory, mercenaries overstep their rightful claim. They want to share the glory with the patriots. But they traded all claims to glory for unconditional compensation, independent of outcome.
Fighting for a cause in which they believe is part of the patriots’ reward. As is all of the glory when the battle is won.
In a lot of ways that’s why so much of the great software in the world originates in the open source community. The compensation model almost assures that the contributors are patriots. In the software business, the corollary isn’t necessarily a given. When I think about companies which have truly succeeded at defining a new category or market, they’re the ones filled with patriots not mercenaries. You can get paid and be a patriot. It just depends on what’s the cause you’re fighting for - the paycheck or the movement.
This is an interesting take on compensation in a startup. What’s your take? Hank
As a co-op student in Mechanical Engineering, I have spent almost two years in the “workplace” and have experienced this struggle firsthand in “corporate” America. I had never “categorized” people like this before, but it definitely has some truth to it. I think it can be beneficial to think about the “patriot/mercenary dichotomy” when getting involved with a company/organization to see if your “personality type” matches the goals/aims/objectives of the organization. But, the article is very interesting and gives some food for thought.
It sounds like it makes sense. I have never experienced it first hand, but I have experienced the difference between people who just want to do their job and do it good no doubt (Mercenaries), and those who could never be a mercenary and need to do something “big” and “meaningful” to feel accomplished (Patriots). I, personally, have the heart of a “patriot”; although I do want to make money for myself, I can’t imagine that being it. I have the strong desire to be revolutionary.
I wouldn’t have categorized people as Patriots and Mercenaries, but the concept definitely makes sense. I’ve worked in a corporate office for the past 2 summers, and have been able to easily distinguish between those who are seeking leverage rather than impact and those who seek to have an impact on certain causes/efforts. It’s easy for me to fit in because I am working and assigned to tasks in order to contribute to a certain effort/project with other “Patriots.”
I never really stopped to think about and analyze who fit in what category, but this has got me thinking about it. These personality types would be something to think about when joining the workforce of a company. Interesting article Hank!
That whole blog post can be summed up as “We’re looking for people who want to make meaning versus people looking only to make money.”
I’m not sure he’s saying much of anything about compensation, b/c no hardcore programmer starts a company or joins a startup unless he/she genuinely likes to program AND make money. Hardcore programmers that *really* don’t care about making money simply contribute to the open source community in their free time.
This is an interesting was to categorize people. I think there should be a middle category also… one between that patriot and the mercenary. This would be the person who knows when and where it is a good time to be innovative.
I like that we are debating about how to categorize some people in the workforce. I have to admit the blog post by Blist was a little dramatic. I can see Kristeen’s point-of-view, I think there are times when people should know when to follow, and know when to lead. And for all of their talk about money being the only motivating factor for some, well I think money is always a motivating factor, maybe not THE factor but one nevertheless. If Blist is looking for only patriots, I think they should realize that you will always be dealing with some sort of mercenary, just learn to identify why they are that and find what it will take to turn that mercenary into a patriot.
i agree with kristeen. I think for some companies I would be a patriot and for others I would be a mercenary.
this one focuses on categorize some people in the workfoce. I must say that there are times when people must know when to be a leader and when to be a follower. I mean some people could would be a patriot for the company while others lack
There are some good points in there, but is a fairly obvious observation. People are motivated, usually, by two things: Getting paid (or keep their job to keep getting paid) and their passion for the project. The getting paid part usually leads to only doing enough to keep your job and maybe get a raise every now and then, but this person could really careless if the company as a whole does well or even if the project does well, he is only looking out for himself. The other “patriot” is motivated by his desire to change something, he is inspired by what he is doing and this inspiration leads to him willing to go the extra mile to produce the best product on or before a deadline.
This article, to me, pretty much just said you want patriots… well no crap, if you had the choice between two people, both of equal skill, but one didn’t care what was going on and the other will stay to 8pm every day to get it done, who would you hire?
It also said that if your patriots are not skillful you may need to hire some “mercs” to pick up the slack… again, no crap.
But to be bitter because your “mercs”, without which you wouldn’t have finished/your product wouldn’t be as good, want some credit for the work they did is crazy! They worked and got the job done, something your patriots couldn’t do, so why shouldn’t they celebrate their accomplishments and get a little credit for doing it?
Jim
I agree with Hwan. There is a time and place to be a leader and a follower. There are too many people in this world that have a greed for power (the reason there are so many wars…people want power over the lands). Sometimes it is good to be determined to have things your own way, but other times people just need to realize it’s time to step back and let someone else take over. It sounds like Blitz is looking only for patriots. This will never work in a business, as much as they would love to have all leaders. No business can survive on leader, or “patriots,” alone. There has to be people behind the leader to back them up and make sure the job gets done. Take, for example, my parent’s jewelry business. Dad is the technical owner, but mom’s name is somewhere in there too. They disagree on many subjects when it comes to making business decisions. If neither of them ever backed down and always had to have their way, there would not be an existing business there today.
This is pretty obvious. There are people who want money and people who want to make a difference. Last night our keynote speaker brought this up, but I first heard this statement from Guy Kawasaki. He jokes that it’s the ones who go into business trying to make meaning that end up making the money and the ones that go in for the money are more probable to fail. If your intentions are to solve people’s problems, you’ll probably do great.
Businesses that are truly successful have to have the patriot at the helm. People who get into
entreprenuership for money and not passion for the process are doomed from the start. People
won’t want to go through the hardships it takes to grow their business just for money.
I agree. This reminds me of the need based opportunity foreseen by some entrepreneurs. I do believe this has some truth to it. People truly have passion for what they are doing stick through it even when there year’s profit is $1 as Soyer spoke of. This is the way a business with succeeded. ~John Fodor
This is the very reality that is the business world, and the real world for that matter. I can’t tell you the number of times that I have talked to other pre-pharmacy majors who say, “I can’t wait to be making a hundred grand a year.” I am so in awe when I hear that, because these are most often not the people who are in the field to make a difference in someone’s life, to use their knowledge and education to improve someone’s quality of life. These are the mercenaries. On the other hand, there are those who just want to better society and will do anything and everything in their power to do so. These are the patriots. I see blist’s point about that - and that is something that can be found in all aspects of life. Yet, I think it is very impossible to ever rid the job place of mercenaries. Despite motive, these people may be great workers who can really help advance the company. I am not pleased to admit to that but that is reality.
I like to categorize people and find this particular way fitting for many. Even in everyday life, I know people that only look out for themselves, and those that want to help everyone. In the workplace and in many aspects of life, I feel that I’m more of a mercenary. I suppose it fine for what I want to be though, a freelancer.