You make a good point, but the “clone” part maybe doesn’t stretch as far as you’re supposing. Your clone isn’t going to like the same food as you or adopt the same religious and political views. You’re teaching them a certain way of handling business problems, through a hands-on “master / apprentice” style of teaching. This is very good at helping them learn how YOU do things, and do things in the same way. It isn’t necessarily going to give them the drive / interest to start their own business (since you’ll have already done this long before you met them, you’ll be working with them to run the business you’ve already created).

It definitely is a danger when entrepreneurs hire people who are also very entrepreneurial (especially if they see a lot of themselves in the new hire). As you say, these are the people who are likely going to want to start their OWN company instead of growing yours at some point in the future.

I believe that most business owners work for themselves because they didn’t like working for someone else and get into that whole corporate thing where you have to be political to move up, network with your superiors etc etc.
In order to be in charge of his/her own destiny the entrepreneur works on his own by starting his/her own business. If they train someone else to do their job, what’s the chance of that new hire ( or bunch of hires) stealing the business model or customers and then starting a business of their own?
Or why should the business owner start hiring people and create a corporate culture that he/she doesn’t enjoy when they actually started the business in order to escape from it ( the corporate culture)?

Just because in the theoretical world of business books it says to delegate, delegating should be done very very carefully.

Gates & TMW: yes, you’re both absolutely right. I don’t think its an either / or situation though (you can hire people to enhance the business by bringing new skills to the table, AND hire people who learn to do what you do the way you do it)

TStrumpt: I think you’re right.

Jake: “Good help is hard to find” as all super-
villains like to say

fathersez: I think so (about how to treat people). Plus their’s a selfish component too, if people stick around you don’t have to spend the time/money hiring and training new people!

I agree, MG’s main lesson was about “system”-ising processes (I was going to discuss it further, but thought it might be at odds with the rest of the post – why create processes anyone can follow, then train someone to think the way you do?).

Still I thought that one of MG’s main lessons was to meticulously document and systemise all processes, so that no one becomes indispensable.

I also agree with Gates VP. The first people you hire should be different than you. If you are the technician, hire a sales person. If you are a sales person, hire an operator etc. etc.

One general rule in building a team is having on board is someone who knows the product, someone who can sell it and someone who can grow it.

The office is filled with 20-somethings held together by a few vets in each department. One of the things that’s become very apparent is that variety is important. It’s easy to believe that we need “one more person just like me”, but the businesses I’ve seen typically need one more person who’s “good at the things I suck at”. It sounds like marriage, it kind of is

There’s definitely a benefit to having some shared background and experience, but if I wanted to add an “apprentice” to my office I would add somebody who can do things I can’t to help fill in the gaps.

Of course YMMV