The article does a decent job of discussing growth hacking just after Sean Ellis wrote about it in 2010. You can find most substantial content on tactics and best practices else where.
I am glad the importance of growth is spreading to the mainstream but people need more meat these days.
most growth hackers or growth pros are product managers or product editors,so the post starts with the wrong premise.
Also, your accusations against growth hackers are titled based rather than what they do or learning about what growth hackers do. If growth hackers choose to identify themselves with each other in a new way, I don't think there is an issue. Let them be. Remember, front-end engineering wasn't considered much of a position 5 years ago. Same with UX, UI, data scientist, etc. How about SEO specialist or direct-marketers.... Can they self-idenitfy a new sub-division of marketing?
Adam Smith was right, people specialize as an industry expands to offer greater value in a niche. Growth has become essential to startups. Growth teams are becoming standard at scaling startups. Thus, growth hackers appeared.
It is fine to express a distaste for a growth hacker by what he or she does, seems silly to dislike them for their title. That is like saying "I hate chocolate because of they call it "chocolate""
I must say degrading the work Sean Ellis and Andrew Chen have done by comparing them to meaningless consultants from the dot-com era is disgusting. Andrew Chen is one of the most brilliant viral engineers on this planet. Sean Ellis has rocketed several companies to success and just acquired a KISS company. I don't respect ad hominem attacks, neither should you.
It is fine to express a distaste for a growth hacker by what he or she does, seems silly to dislike them for their title.
I would say exactly the opposite. I expect the average HN reader has tremendous respect for what "growth hackers" DO. But I also think that a lot of the kickback against the term is the perception (justified or not) that it's an unnecessary, vacuous term that (ironically) is "just marketing". Or, IOW, a fluffy title that some people have adopted to make themselves sound more interesting.
If these folks were routinely being called Marketing Strategists or something, I doubt there would be all this discussion about it.
I have a huge respect for both Ellis and Chen, and stated that on several occasions in the blog post. The same goes for what 'growth hackers' do, in fact, I could call myself one since I do both marketing and coding! I just don't like the term growth hacker, as this is just another buzz word for something that just isn't new. I wholeheartedly agree on the ad hominem attacks, they are low. This piece wasn't meant as one, and I apologize if it came across that way.
As an avid crossfitter and Paleo adherent, Paleo does wonderings for losing weight. I have seen people shed 20 pounds over a summer. You don't lose weight by going to the gym, it is through your diet. "Abs are made in the kitchen, not in the gym".
Actually they are not just "marketing people". They top growth hackers are often full-stack developers (Jesse Farmer, Matt Humphrey, Jim Young, Mike Greenfield, Dan Martell, Danielle Morrill, Ivan Kirgin etc).
This is not inbound marketing but building product that, at its core, is focused on growth. LinkedIn, Zynga, Quora, Twitter, and Facebook all have growth teams.
Do you know Dropbox's brilliant referral strategy? That was the brainchild of Sean Ellis (growth hacker), Ivan Kirigin (growth hacker), and Dropbox leadership.
The goal of a marketer is to grow a customer base. That's what these growth hackers are doing, they're just doing it in a more technically advanced way via data confirmation and split testing.
Referral strategies have been around for decades, the Dropbox guys didn't hack anything they just applied an old principle to a new technology.
If you dont want to eat there, dont eat there. the government does not need to be involved and dictate where Chickfila should operate (ex. Boston). Let consumers decide what they care about. If they dont care about the CEO's beliefs, let them eat more chicken. If they do, let them go to McD's.
I dont agree with Zuck's beliefs on individualism, privacy, and most policy issues, yet I use Facebook. The product is good.
Thanks! We currently cookie you and remember links you created when logged out (or not signed up) and merge them to your account when you create OR login again. Is this what you meant, or is there another case I am not thinking of?
I think the better question is "who has gone from a safe, corporate job to a risky startup in an incubator?"
Hopefully, you are working full-time if you go to an incubator :)
Assuming this question is about work-style not risk-reward, I have the following insights:
- The biggest change is that you are in charge of your day, not your manager. It is very easy to get distract by the glamour of meetups, TechCrunch, and posting on HackerNews (love that Karma). There is no overlord telling you where to go or what to do. It is you and your company (or idea). Even if you have a CEO and you are the first hire, most likely the founders are going to be busy. They expect you to be an awesome self-starter.
- Work life balance no longer applies. In a startup, your identity is wrapped deep into your company. Your work is your life. Startups require a significant amount of your time, but a TON of emotional investment. Prepare your loved ones for the bumpy road ahead.
- Most things suck, but a few things are good. Startups prioritize. There are going to be things about your product that suck and things about your product that are great. This metaphor also applies to the entire business. A lot of what you will be doing on a day-to-day basis will end up adding little value to your company. You are trying to figure out your bread and butter but you will lose a lot of loaves and cream along the way.
I am glad the importance of growth is spreading to the mainstream but people need more meat these days.