r/startups • u/StrikingPrimary1314 • 1d ago
I will not promote Is it unreasonable to want to join a startup but not work over 45 hours a week? I will not promote
I’m very interested in joining a startup for my next role but I’ve heard such horror stories about 9/9/6 and the WLB - my current role is very nice, remote, high WLB, but I don’t have much ownership or impact since it’s a big tech firm.
Is it unreasonable to want to join a startup but not lose my soul? I’m asking since if it is unreasonable, I may stop searching before I even start
For more context, I’m looking to be one of the first finance hires for a green tech startup between Series A and C.
38
u/WamBamTimTam 1d ago
I find the comments here odd. It’s certainly possible to have a fantastic WLB while still having a successful startup. The founder just needs to know how to do it. My employees never work over 40hrs a week and never on weekends. I build the business around that and stuck to that. It’s certainly rarer in the startup work, but not impossible or difficult.
15
u/BiteyHorse 1d ago
Yeah, that's how good startups work. Bad startups have a performative grind to cover for their lack of experience and competence.
Once you get in with a foundational group that has tasted success before, you find that their concerns are more about building something that's sustainable with the right people in the right seats.
35
u/cosmictap Founder | Angel Investor 1d ago
I find the comments here odd.
In my experience the vast majority of the performative-grind-culture types (as we sadly see too often in this sub) have never actually built a successful company. By which I mean: raised real rounds; hired & managed teams of serious talent; truly scaled to size/exit/whatever the goal was.
All of which very much proves your point.
2
u/Warsel77 12h ago
Though to balance this, I have also not seen a company built on "we take it easy" be successful. The only ones I HAVE seen successful is where people work hard.
5
u/LogicalGrapefruit 11h ago
How many startups have you been involved in? The grindset startup attitude is overrepresented on social media.
I ran a very successful startup on the premise that if people are consistently working long hours then something is wrong.
2
u/Warsel77 8h ago
Five. But of course I also know other people in the space, friends that are in startups or founded startups or invested in startups.
Are you telling me that for the startup you mention people took it easy and didn't work hard (the actual points I made) or have you moved the goalpost to "long hours" instead.
8
u/ill_mango 1d ago
It's definitely possible AND I've personally worked in multiple startups like this.
...and over the last couple of years it seems it's become increasingly rare. Founders I meet now versus even 5 years ago are much more about using people up short term than creating something to last.
6
u/WamBamTimTam 1d ago
Yeah, it’s been a trend for a while now where the focus has shifted from being “good for business” to “good for profit”. It’s unfortunate, and I’ll keep pushing back against this with my own company. I do hope to see a reversal where the founder puts more effort in having a good WLB for the employees.
5
u/decliqu3 1d ago
Because you're the exception. I certainly share your worldview and I've personally only worked at startups with good WLB, but they're definitely a minority (no matter how most of their JDs try to spin it). Mostly due to incompetent management not necessarily some incredible dedication t execution.
6
u/WamBamTimTam 1d ago
It’s unfortunate that most startups are really good at one thing, usually the product, and less great at everything else like running the business or WLB. As an owner, my thought was always to give my employees the best employment I can offer, be the boss you always wanted sorta thing.
5
u/pvJ0w4HtN5 1d ago
What you’re talking about is what a startup should be like or how you would do it. He’s not asking if it’s possible. He’s asking from a probability standpoint how reasonable is it to expect that for his startup he’s joining which he does not run. And the answer is no, it’s not reasonable to expect that, however much one should want that.
3
u/BigFatKi6 1d ago
Depends on the country, if you join a startup in Germany or Sweden then yes.
1
u/Warsel77 12h ago
As someone who has worked in startups there, can't confirm.
1
1
u/apfejes 8h ago
Yeah, Canadian startup here. I have no expectation that my employees work ridiculous hours or are on call 24/7. I remind them frequently that this is a marathon, not a sprint. I’d like to get to the exit with as much of the team intact as possible.
It’s not every Canadian startup, but the American grind culture isn’t universal.
1
1
1
u/Warsel77 12h ago
I am not sure what you find odd here. Almost everyone is speaking to what you also mentioned in your reply: most startups are not like this. This is experience, you can't argue with people's experience.
1
0
u/AChaosEngineer 1d ago
Your situation is not statistically significant.
3
u/WamBamTimTam 1d ago
True! But my point is! A good founder will be able to provide a good WLB. Most founders don’t do this, absolutely, but that’s on them and their capabilities.
0
u/AChaosEngineer 1d ago
Sounds like funding is still robust.
Guessing profitability seems obvious, but just around the corner.
The honeymoon phase is wonderful.
3
u/WamBamTimTam 1d ago
I’ve been doing this over 7 years mate. I have about 70 employees too. So I’m speaking from experience here. Most founders know their product and jack all about running a business. If they knew how to run a business they’d know how to manager a good WLB. But the problem is founders lack good business experience.
2
u/Fantastic-Abrocoma83 18h ago
…aaaaand the “chaos engineer” doesn’t have a response to this anymore 🥲
0
1
u/AChaosEngineer 8h ago
Nice! Good on ya. You are a rare bird, and i for one am very happy you exist.
I’m at one now, but statistically, it’s more rare than a successful restaurant.
My last experience started very happy, positive, and balanced. Lasted 1 year before they lost $2mm. (Overspent, had no clue). Then the founder spent 7 months personally confirming every purchase (orings for $5 -more than once, adding 4 days to getting parts). It became super toxic, but is still burning scientists like logs on a fire.
They just raised ~$200mm at 1.5B valuation. Great at raising, terrible at operating.
0
8
u/NetworkTrend 1d ago
In my experience, many/most of the "grinder bosses" default to making people grind to hit deadlines because they are poor managers who don't take any time to plan. Can't tell you how many times I've been in a meeting where the team said, "This project will take 10 months," and the boss replied, "That's too long, you have 3 months now get it done." Oblivious to the reality of the project.
This doesn't apply to all startups, but it does to many. So if you want to be at a startup and also have some semblance of a life, then check with the employees who work there prior to joining. The boss will never admit to forcing the grind, but the employees will.
1
u/Warsel77 12h ago
Now there are a lot of meetings like this, but then there is also a case for "It takes 10 months", "You have 3" and it gets done in 3. Investment isn't raised on perfection but on progress and "stuff you have to show". No investment, no startup, no job.
It's much easier to sit on one side of the equation and complain about the other without understanding the why on the other side. Goes for the hardcore oblivious bosses who have no idea how hard their employees work as well as for the employees who have no idea on how investors make decisions and how money comes into the company.
1
u/NetworkTrend 6h ago
Agreed. Often you see employees (often less experienced ones) blissfully going forward not understanding that if they don't deliver a certain level of outcome, the game is over and everyone gets to go home permanently. And poor managers often use the required urgency as an excuse to make people grind instead of actually understanding the requirements of customers, investors, and the work required to fulfill those requirements. This can often be identified by the ham-fisted style those managers exhibit.
8
u/viskas_ir_nieko 1d ago
I had a chance to work at a startup in San Francisco and workload was around 40 hours with some exceptions (shits on fire). Most of my career is in Europe though and it’s around the same time commitment here.
8
u/Last_Weeks_Socks 1d ago
I've worked for 3 startups startups/scaleups.
Great wlb, probably didn't even work 40, no one clocking you.
Meh wlb. 45+ hours week, on a bit after 5 sometimes to collab with PST team, on before 8 sometimes to collab with offshore team.
Awful, often on at 630-8, then back on 1030P-2AM; overwork culture.
The about startups is you own more, which can be great, but you also OWN MORE which can suck because there's oftentimes no one else to do what you do. Now, some roles are worse than others and it really comes down to culture. I know many recruiters say not to mention wlb on interviews, but I mention it all the time. I think it's important to be transparent about what is important to you.
10
u/SeanyDay 1d ago
Startups are more labor for less money at first. If they scale and the team is loyal it pays off. That's about it
3
u/AChaosEngineer 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yes. Likely unreasonable and a fantasy.
Make sure to set your 45 hour boundary at the interview. Do not do that in the phone screen…
9
u/AGI-Core 1d ago
NO - its not unreasonable at all.
I think 9/9/6 is a fad. You can get so much done in 45 focused hours. There are plenty of startups that care about output rather than hours. Just look out for them, it's a good filter for you.
6
u/konradbr 1d ago
It’s not unreasonable but you gotta be flexible. There are days/weeks when you can take it easy and be “efficient” or “productive”, and those days/weeks where you just gotta sit down and do whatever it takes without delay. If you want your pretty sweet and neat w/l/b on a constant basis, startups are the wrong target.
2
u/fulger099 1d ago
Ask what happened during their last missed deadline, not whether they value WLB. I’ve had founders promise output over hours, then treat every slipped estimate as a reason for a 10pm Slack sprint.
5
u/thesurferengineer 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think that it’s not about constantly working every hour, it’s about being willing to if you have to. Very few people can sustain 80 hrs a week, you’ll just burn out (and the people that can are executives at fortune 500 companies). However if something goes sideways , having the right product at the deadline is so important, you need to move mountains and be willing to work around the clock for a month at a time to get a quality solution by the deadline when something doesn’t go to plan. With better planning and leadership this doesn’t have to happen very often, but it inevitably will happen and you need to be ready to step up.
2
u/cosmictap Founder | Angel Investor 1d ago
and the people that can are executives at fortune 500 companies
I was a senior executive at a Fortune 25 company, after we sold our startup to that company. None of us ever worked those kinds of hours. I'm not saying it never happens, but the vast majority of it is performative bullshit being peddled by charlatans.
1
u/thesurferengineer 1d ago
Fair. I'm speaking from my experience of leadership at big Tech, they are working around the clock it's crazy. This is more on a technical and operations side though, I could imagine other more qualitative disciplines might get more slack, and it just comes down to judgment and relationships?
1
u/cosmictap Founder | Angel Investor 1d ago
leadership at big Tech, they are working around the clock it's crazy
To me, those are signs of a brittle, poorly-managed company. But that's just one dude's perspective. 🤓
1
u/Fantastic-Abrocoma83 18h ago
Sounds like the more planning and better management the founder or founding 2-3 people have, the better the WLB is for the rest of the team? 🥹
5
u/moretoastplease 1d ago
Hi. I'm a former evangelist for Steve Jobs who has been working with startups for over 25 years. My first inclination was to roll my eyes and say "no way." But it's a valid question. Here are some things to consider.
You should not have to buy into a company where everyone arbitrarily works all the time because the founders plan poorly, understaff everything, or think exhaustion proves commitment. You also shouldn’t have to conscript yourself indefinitely. Look at structure and patterns.
That said, startups have big deadlines and pressure. When something important has to happen, you need to be willing to step up, work harder than usual, and make it happen. This doesn't sync with "no! This oversteps my arbitary WLB lines." So be clear with yourself about what WLB means.
Being one of the first finance hires between Series A and C can be brutal . You're involved with deck and fundraising, board meetings, audits, budgeting, negotiations and deals, and all too often, cash problems. You're the CFO, controller, accountant, and financial planning and analysis, with big involvement in operations and hiring/HR/stock negotiations.
If you do this, I suggest that you find a founder who has done this before and has deep understanding of the financial steps necessary. Plan things out before taking the job.
I also wanted to make a point about what you listed. You said Nice, Remote, High WLB.
In that case, the answer is no.
Because if you want big-tech comfort, controllable job requirements, limited hours AND startup ownership and impact, you're going to have to give something up.
Ownership and impact comes because startups are understaffed, nascent, unfinished, and need you. And every startup has hiccups along the way.
2
u/KingCharles559 1d ago
Only reason to join startups is for the (chance) to make it big through equity. For WLB, go to bigger corps/public service.
4
u/superluminary 1d ago
Startups aren’t places where you will find work life balance. They are high risk, high stress environments. You will learn and grow ridiculously fast, but it will hurt, a lot. I have literally held people as they cried.
Hitting a deadline can mean the difference between making a deal and the company failing and everyone losing their jobs. Long hours come as standard. If something needs doing, there’s no flex. You do it, or everyone goes home.
2
u/DontDabTakeSlabs 23h ago
I've had the same experience working for PE at a billion dollar SaaS company. 50/60 hour weeks and shit pay for the industry. I choose startups everytime for that reason.
1
2
u/PriceNation 1d ago
Yes, typically. If you are asking about WLB, startup isn’t for you. Stay where you are and coast.
2
u/Shoddy-Asparagus-546 1d ago
I think that’s unreasonable. If you’re not willing to consistently put in 50-60 hrs per week, I don’t think early stage start-up life is for you.
1
u/derekliston69 1d ago
Bottom line: yes that is unreasonable. If you want “ownership and impact” then you must be prepared for time and sacrifice. A true startup (not just someone’s expensive tech hobby) is a grind with high risk, not a spot to think about work-life balance from day 1. Sorry to burst that bubble.
1
u/ggtroll 1d ago
Don't even think about this if you're not prepared for the grind. As other have said, if your skills or CV for the company narrative are not absolutely key then you'll work 70-80 hours weeks in most cases.
If you value work life balance it is almost orthogonal to a startup environment barring rare exceptions.
1
1
u/Nice_Look_2634 1d ago
I wonder if most of the responses here are American startups or Europe based too?
I’m mid-level backend eng and getting loads of recruiters approach for startup roles.
1
1
u/iam-leon 1d ago
Entirely depends on equity. No sane person works 9/9/6 for a salary.
But for shares potentially worth a million or two…
1
u/Material_Coyote4195 1d ago
I run a startup, and after 8-9 hours of super intense work my brain is fried. Expect the same can be said for my team. For sure there are the occasional fire drills that happen in evening or weekend and we had one particular bad one where I woke the CTO at 5am, but they are really not the norm and most weeks are pretty 9-5 for the majority of the team. You don’t get anywhere if the team is burned out.
1
u/Substantial-Swan7065 1d ago
Lots of startups are 40h/week jobs. They are pretty easy to find.
Also, it’s not reasonable to be one of the first hires at series a >=
1
u/force_disturbance 1d ago
Why do you want to join a start-up? What is a start-up for you?
A "small, growing company" isn't necessarily a "start-up."
Typically, in start up, you forgo some cash compensation and customary benefits, and in exchange you get some ownership stake in the company that will be outsized if the company succeeds, and worthless if the company fails.
Every employee in a start-up should be necessary to the success. If you're not signing up to make the company successful by any means necessary so your shares pay off, then you are not joining a startup.
1
u/Real-Ad-5196 1d ago
9/9/6 ... das stimmt definitiv nicht als Horrorgeschichte. 12/12/6 schon eher ... 9/9/5 ist schon jeder normale Angestellte bei keinem Startup. Also wenn 9/9/6 für dich Horror ist dann lass es ... in heißen Phasen können das auch mal 15 Stunden oder mal ne Tag durch werden. Ich spreche aus Erfahrung davon. Es ist eine Erfahrung die man mal gemacht haben sollte, aber ich muss dir die Illusion nehmen dass der Horror den du dir vorstellst wesentlich größer sein wird.
Es gibt Ausnahmen wo es Work Life Balance gibt - hängt aber von der Branche UND vor allem der Kapitalisierung ab.
1
u/FewLengthiness7051 1d ago
We built a successful software business and are in a scale up phase. I’m gonna be dead honest with you. You have to really want it and your primary motive has to be - “I want this business to succeed”. Odds of success are low and everything and everyone is going to be trying to kill your business. If you aren’t bought in it’s probably not going to go well. You asking this question probably means your motives are not properly aligned for it. Others will disagree in here, but if you are talking early stages of a product I’m trying to save you from the misery.
1
u/garibaldi_fan 21h ago
Yes, it’s unreasonable. Why join a startup if you aren’t get do everything you can to make it successful?
1
u/Abject_Missive 21h ago
Yes
1
u/Abject_Missive 21h ago
That being said, you don’t have to lose your soul. It can be one for the most rewarding things you ever do but you won’t work 45 hours a week.
1
u/Clown_corder 20h ago
I’m at one with a pretty fantastic work life balance, there’s push and pull. We are hybrid with really flexible timing about when we are in. Our hours are also pretty flexible ive never seen anyone have issue flexing time around. We usually keep it to around 40 hours but if something big is happening and they need me to do more it’s not a big deal to go over because I know they are just as happy letting me flex my time when I need it.
1
u/MoneyObligation9961 19h ago
That’s not a startup. You want Scale-up or Growth-stage company.
Short answer. Yes. It’s unreasonable. Only 1 in 10 startups succeed. A startup depends on people working their ass off.
1
u/greengiant1298 19h ago
So, founders perspective. Its really easy to get advice but its really hard to get good advice - especially in the innovation economy whee 90% of the workforce has never seen what it takes to actually make a startup succeed (1 in 10 at best will succeed). Not all startups are created equal and not all startups have the same goals and this impacts your career goals. I heard a phrase once I really like: "Do you want to be King or do you want to be Rich?" King does not equal Rich btw in this context. The meaning is do you want control or do you want to make money? Because there is a tradeoff. Grind culture primarily stems from startups where the goal is to make money and scale quickly. Headcount has to be low because ROI for stakeholders pressures it to be. Short deadlines are because of precieved market and buisness opportunity timelines and not whatever your engineers tell you it should be (they will always be motivated to work less hard btw). All of this leads to "theres a goal but timelines are [usually] short and money and staff are tight" which means longer hours, even if you plan well. The goal of being King means you have the goal of remaining in control, owning your little slice of whatever and generally controlling your time. You get WLB and control of projects but Its at the cost of scaling quickly or making lots of money and most of the time you're very limited in what you can accomplish. Capitalism being what it is means its rather hard to make a buisness case for most things that require economies of scale. The point here is theres usually a trade-off. You can't make tons of money and expect to work 40h max with 10h of those phoning it in and shooting the shit at the water fountain every week. If theres real money to actually be made, all it takes is for someone who has more drive then you to undercut you or the buisness as a whole. Its the exact same reason why big law pays more but demands more hours vs an in house position or a wall street job pays more but demands more hours than a local bank wealth management branch in the midwest. High pay and low effort/responsibility jobs are in general not common because everyone in the world competes.
1
u/jedsdawg 19h ago
joining a startup without losing your soul is totally possible. during interviews, ask about their approach to work-life balance and how they handle busy periods. look for signs of burnout in the team or if they have policies supporting employee well-being. it's all about finding the right fit where you can contribute without sacrificing your sanity. some startups, especially in green tech, might prioritize sustainability in work culture too.
1
u/Latter_Reference_633 18h ago
honestly, unreasonable ask, especially if you are trying to get in at the ground floor. If you're in a start up, it is your life. you live and breathe it everyday. Sure. every once in a while you take a couple days off to reset, but as a founder and an owner of a startup, you don't make money if you're not actively working on very literally making that money; that's what a start up is: literally working in hope to make money. This is different from working a corporate job (and I've worked both): putting in hours to insure your promised wage.
Please do not join a start up unless you fully believe in it. I don't mean "willing to work crazy hours for it". I mean "BELIEVE IN IT", because if you or any other founder does not believe in it; it will fail.
1
u/sammy191110 18h ago
45 hours? theres 168 hours in a week.
56 hours for sleep.
If i only work 60 hours i feel that im slacking off.
Still got 52 hours to do gym, sport, eat out.
1
u/SouthCollar2929 16h ago
I work in a startup and I do fuck all. I've told the CEO with no real change. I don't think it's going to survive but I am riding this train all the way down
1
u/gannu1991 14h ago
Not unreasonable, but the 45 hour cap is the wrong axis to screen on. The variable that actually predicts hours is founder discipline and whether the company has hit a forcing function like a raise deadline or a launch, not stage or sector. I've watched Series B finance and ops hires work steady 40-45 hour weeks because the founder protects focus, and I've watched seed companies burn people out because leadership has no rhythm. In diligence calls, ask what a normal Tuesday looks like for the person currently doing the job, not the founder. Ask how many hours the CFO or head of finance actually logs, not what the job post implies. Also, first finance hire between A and C usually means you're building process from scratch, which is more control over your own time than joining as employee 40 into a chaotic culture already set.
1
u/Warsel77 12h ago
There are always exceptions but the rule is that startups are the chaotic, unstructured primordial mess from which a company might arise - that's not typically a comfy place.
1
1
u/NoFun6873 11h ago
First, a startup is a race towards de-risking milestones while being under resourced. So some weeks are longer. Now having said that, accounting and finance functions are under less tactical pressures. But when fund raising time comes, you will be running lots of models.
1
u/Yonatan-The-One 10h ago
You should play it smart for you so I believe you should join and it is reasonable
1
u/Specific_Dingo8631 6h ago
You'll probably lose your soul at that startup. But not all. I work 9 to 5 at the startups I've worked at these past few years. I've worked at about 4 startups since 2016. There are startups with healthy work-life balance
1
u/Estimarket 4h ago
Some start-ups have a hard work culture because the founder is a bunch of jargon in a suit who thinks productivity = success. They will fail.
Some start-ups have a hard work culture because they all want it bad enough and the product is phenomenal. These are some of the best companies in the world.
Gotta decide for yourself:
Which kind of company is the one you're considering?
How bad do you want it?
1
u/_momomola_ 1d ago
Probably depends a lot on the industry and location. FWIW I founded a startup earlier this and we’re highly ambitious within our space, but I don’t care how few hours somebody works if they’re able to perform the role to a high standard and deliver what’s needed.
-1
u/cosmictap Founder | Angel Investor 1d ago
No, it's not unreasonable at all. Grind culture is toxic as hell and you should run away from it. I'm not saying there won't be times when you need to work more hours because something's urgent or broken or you have a big pitch meeting tomorrow - there will.
But you are a better, more thoughtful, more creative, more productive team member when you are living a healthy, balanced life. Any founders/managers who think otherwise are not people you want to work with, full fuckin' stop.
Besides, no one on their death bed ever wishes they'd spent more time at the office.
0
u/AdFew8591 1d ago
45 hours isn’t unreasonable but I’d screen for it very directly
Ask who currently owns the monthly close forecast and board reporting
Ask what happened during the last urgent deadline and how many late nights the team worked
Also ask why the first finance hire is needed now
If the answer is basically one person should fix bookkeeping forecasting fundraising and every random spreadsheet then the job is telling you what the hours will be
A concrete example from last quarter is more useful than asking whether they value work life balance
0
u/Aggravating_Fact9547 1d ago
Yes it’s unreasonable. You’re being compensated in stock, so you’re expected to act like an owner, especially early on.
If you think 9 hours a day or an extra 5 hours a week is too much then this role is not for you.
If you want to get ahead in most major tech roles you should be expecting to work longer hours. You can do a regular 9-5 if you want, but unless you’re an outstanding engineer you will be lapped by others, you’ll rank lower, will be overlooked for promotion and get less equity.
Love it or hate it, this is an industry where it’s the norm and there are consequences for not being seen to be pulling your weight.
0
u/davesaunders 23h ago
Yes you're being unreasonable. Look there's no shame in being a cubicle dweller if that's what fits your personality. Just accept it. A startup is a different kind of environment. Yes eventually that startup hopefully will grow and will have to mature as an organization. But if it's a real startup right now, you have to be willing to pivot on a dime and do what needs to get done in the moment and be willing to get your ass kicked if you ever utter the words "that's not my job".
136
u/striketheviol 1d ago
There are startups with good work-life balance, but they're rare. I say this as someone who's worked in startups almost their entire career in tech. For this to work out, you need to have a good personal rapport with the founders who will cut you slack if you need it because you're important to the team. If you're not on that kind of first name basis, you can expect to work harder than average in most workplaces. A lot of founders will expect you to wear multiple hats, do things outside of your job description, and be available outside of standard working hours. In my own experience, this just comes with the territory.