That's an interesting question. I imagine that the organizational blueprints have remained the same over time but the number of startups within each category are probably heavily influenced by exogenous factors such as generational perspectives and the economy. In an economy when investments are harder to secure, we might see more autocratic company cultures forming.
This research is interesting from the perspective of culture modelling. My observations show that the culture is usually driven by the founding team, at least at the beginning of the company journey.
I'd speculate about the role of luck (market timing, random connections, etc.) in a company's success that should have been mentioned in the research. We've seen many great companies varnished from the market despite a good culture.
At the end of the day, it is the awareness that is vital for the employees/employers. How do they see the culture they want to thrive in, and what companies are willing to do to differentiate themselves in the talent market.
Any thoughts on how this may have changed since this was published? Wondering if shifting demographics, priorities or economic factors have impacted.
That's an interesting question. I imagine that the organizational blueprints have remained the same over time but the number of startups within each category are probably heavily influenced by exogenous factors such as generational perspectives and the economy. In an economy when investments are harder to secure, we might see more autocratic company cultures forming.
This research is interesting from the perspective of culture modelling. My observations show that the culture is usually driven by the founding team, at least at the beginning of the company journey.
There was great research about engineering productivity/company competitiveness and specifically about the engineering culture in companies like Borland (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/2816856_Borland_Software_Craftsmanship_A_New_Look_at_Process_Quality_and_Productivity) , which I think is more about patterns of communication and work organisations rather than hiring for a fit or skills.
I'd speculate about the role of luck (market timing, random connections, etc.) in a company's success that should have been mentioned in the research. We've seen many great companies varnished from the market despite a good culture.
At the end of the day, it is the awareness that is vital for the employees/employers. How do they see the culture they want to thrive in, and what companies are willing to do to differentiate themselves in the talent market.