The Lim­its of Com­pany Val­ues:

Every value we had artic­u­lated came with an “anti-value” of some­thing else — a bias towards one side of a pole, and a push-against the other. Thus is the nature of val­ues — for exam­ple, valu­ing “adapt­abil­ity” means we’re de-valuing what­ever we think of as its oppo­site. Yet while we often think of this oppo­site neg­a­tively (e.g. “rigid­ity”), the same energy we’re reject­ing can come out with a use­ful expres­sion as well (e.g. “stability”).

The flow fal­lacy:

the goal of com­mer­cial soft­ware devel­op­ment isn’t to cre­ate code you love—it’s to cre­ate prod­ucts your cus­tomers will love.

Tear It Down:

There are three lead­ers. I’m going to describe these three arche­types in a hypo­thet­i­cal large com­pany, but I believe aspects of them exist in all groups of peo­ple work­ing together on a col­lec­tive goal.

Medium’s met­ric that mat­ters: Total Time Read­ing:

I some­times char­ac­ter­ize Medium as con­tent match­mak­ing: we want peo­ple to write, and oth­ers to read, great posts. It’s two-sided: one can’t exist with­out the other. What is the core activ­ity that con­nects the two sides? It’s read­ing. Read­ers don’t just view a page, or click an ad. They read.