Most 'early-stage' companies make the mistake of treating management like a binary switch. One day you're an IC, the next you're a manager. Title changes, calendar fills with 1:1s, and we expect the transition to be clean.
At Pump.co, we made the same mistake 🙈
What I've realized over the last couple of months is that management is a spectrum. Player to coach. And where you sit on it should shift as your team grows from 6 to 20 people.
- At 6, you're mostly player, maybe 20% coach.
- At 10, you're 40% coach.
- At 13-15, you're 60% coach.
- At 20, you're all coach, no longer playing yourself.
The shape changes by function - CSM, BDR, AE, eng each have their own rhythm. But the spectrum still holds.
The cost of getting this wrong is asymmetric.
Over-index on "manager" and you pull your most valued player (pun intended) away from where they create the most value. Their output drops. The team's output doesn't go up enough to make up for it.
Under-index and someone's running a 15-person team while still trying to close their own deals or ship their own code. Balls drop. The team's ceiling becomes their bandwidth.
We've since recalibrated across our AE, CSM, and eng teams.
The shift in thinking: stop asking "are they an IC or a manager?" Start asking "what's the right player/coach mix for the team size they're running today?"
Different question. Different answer.