WhatsApp scaled to 1B users with only 50 engineers
My experience is, # of engineers is directly related to # of product people, which is in turn related to <i>quantity</i> (not quality) of ideas that the founders&#x2F;leaders are desperate to try out.<p>Higher <i>quantity</i> of ideas == More engineers. Higher <i>quality</i> of ideas == Fewer engineers.<p>WhatsApp success is not about what WhatsApp did, it&#x27;s about everything they <i>didn&#x27;t</i> do. No desktop, no browser (until after reaaaaaaallly long), no account creation (your phone number is enough, thanks), no hidden ad engine, no hundreds of stupid features that product people stuff down in the name of experimentation.<p>There are some leaders who want anything and everything: Throw 100 darts in the wall. Leave what sticks (don&#x27;t touch or nurture it). Go back to throwing 100 more. The other guy does that? We want that too. Mobile? Yes. Desktop? Yes. Browser? Yes. Different affiliate channels? Yes. Custom features for B2B partners? Yes. Merchandizing? Yes. Build a mini Ad engine? Yes. Multi user profile management systems? Yes. Yes, yes, yes, every requirement is a go.<p>The crucial difference is: What happens when you have a restricted pool of people, but insist on doing 100s of things? Some leaders simply treat this as an &quot;org structure&quot; problem, not a problem of focus. They slice and dice the org until the 30 people become split into teams of 2-3 with a manager for each, running into coordination hell on each step – just so that more quantity of features can be seen on paper. This is how most startups are, except for those rare few which don&#x27;t &quot;talk&quot; about focusing, but actually focus.