How They Do It · An interactive essay
Why does work get slower as companies grow?
Companies hire more people because they want to do more.
Yet somewhere along the way, adding people starts making everything feel slower.
How They Do It · An interactive essay
Companies hire more people because they want to do more.
Yet somewhere along the way, adding people starts making everything feel slower.
Communication is direct. Context lives in people’s heads. Decisions can happen in seconds.
Ten people. Still a small team. But watch the lines.
Headcount went from 4 to 10. Possible conversations went from 6 to 45.
Every new person can talk to everyone who is already there, so each hire adds more lines than the last one did.
possible conversations = n(n−1)/2
10 people · 45 possible conversations. Hiring person 11 adds 10 more.
At 100 people, it is 4,950.
Thirty people can’t all talk to each other. So we group them into teams, and the teams talk inside themselves.
That solves the first problem. Now the teams need to talk to each other.
1 of 6
So conversations have somewhere to live.
2 of 6
So everyone hears the same thing at the same time.
3 of 6
So each team has someone who can speak for it.
4 of 6
So everyone knows what is coming next.
5 of 6
So nothing falls through the cracks.
6 of 6
So mistakes get caught before they ship.
None of these decisions are obviously stupid. Most of them make sense locally.
Each one was added by someone solving a real problem. Nobody was in charge of the total.
People increasingly spend time communicating about work, coordinating work, tracking work and asking permission to do work.
In this drawing, they are in five channels and three recurring meetings. Their team’s work passes five approvals before it ships.
None of that is the work they were hired to do.
You didn’t hire slow people. You built a slow system.
Growing companies do not automatically become slow.
But the operating system that worked at five people rarely works unchanged at fifty.
The question is not how to communicate more.
It is how to design a company that needs less coordination to move.
This research should stay independent — support it with a coffee.
Buy me a coffee↗The slowdown is not one thing. It is a handful of mechanisms that compound. Pick one.
Doubling a team from 10 to 20 does not double the possible conversations. It takes them from 45 to 190.
How companies in the library respond
Small product teams of roughly three own an end-to-end project slice, which reduces communication overhead and handoffs.
Tradeoff Creates specialist bottlenecks and key-person risk.
Small autonomous teams and an open handbook shorten the distance between a question and the person who can decide it.
Tradeoff Consciously accepts some integration debt for speed.
None of them found the one correct answer. Each picked a different cost to pay.
Make information asynchronous and explicit.
Similar in the HTDI library
Projects and decisions live as durable, commentable posts on internal P2 blogs, creating searchable context instead of email chains.
Tradeoff Information can fragment across P2s and reading load can grow.
Long discussions and updates live in an internal Async blog, while quick coordination stays in Slack.
Tradeoff Multiple channels create fragmentation and follow-up load.
The right system depends on company size, the kind of work, how much needs to be communicated and how expensive mistakes are. These are directions, not scores.
Placement is an editorial reading of the practices and sources above.
Two questions. This is not a diagnosis, just a shortlist of examples worth a look.
Pick one answer for each question to see a shortlist.