The founder was frustrated. Eight months into building, his team of three developers was behind schedule. Features were slipping. The roadmap looked like a wish list.
His investor's advice was simple: "Just hire more developers."
It sounds logical. More people, more output. Three developers become five, five become eight, and suddenly you're moving faster.
I watched him hire four more developers over the next three months. The team went from three to seven.
And somehow, they got slower.
Not a little slower. A lot slower. Features that took two weeks now took six. Communication became chaos. And the original three developers? Two of them quit.
The "just hire more developers" advice had destroyed more value than it had created.
The Myth of Linear Productivity
There's an assumption baked into startup culture: productivity scales with headcount. Add a developer, get more code. Add two, get even more.
This assumption is wrong. It's been proven wrong again and again. And yet, it persists.
The reason it persists is simple: it feels true. When you're behind and you need to ship, the obvious solution is more people. The alternative—admitting that something is fundamentally wrong with how you're working—is harder to accept.
But here's what actually happens when you add people to a struggling team:
What Really Happens
Week 1: False Hope
New developers join. Everyone's optimistic. The founder thinks, "Finally, we're going to make up ground."
But new developers don't produce on day one. They don't understand the codebase. They don't know the patterns. They're learning while everyone else is waiting.
Week 2-4: The Ramp-Up Tax
The team discovers that onboarding takes time. Senior developers stop building to help new people get up to speed. The codebase gains contributors but loses velocity.
I've watched this happen dozens of times. A team at 80% capacity brings in new people and drops to 50% capacity—not because anyone is lazy, but because teaching takes time.
Month 2: Communication Explosion
Seven people means more meetings. More standups. More slack channels. More pull requests to review.
With three people, you can decide something in a quick conversation. With seven, you need synchronization. The decision that took an hour now takes a day.
Month 3: Coordination Collapse
The founder's investor was right about one thing: the team needed help. But they didn't need more developers. They needed help with the problems that were making them slow.
The problems were:
- Unclear priorities (everything was "urgent")
- No sprint structure (chaos disguised as agility)
- Technical debt that made every change hard
- Missing documentation that made onboarding impossible
Adding developers didn't solve these problems. It amplified them. Every problem that existed at three people existed more intensely at seven.
The Real Question to Ask
When your team is struggling, the question isn't "Do we need more people?"
The question is: "Why is our current team underperforming?"
Because there's almost always a reason. And that reason is rarely "we don't have enough people."
Here are the real reasons teams slow down:
Reason #1: Unclear Priorities
Everyone's working on something different. Nothing is prioritized. Everything is urgent. This creates busy work but not progress.
Reason #2: Broken Processes
Standups that don't accomplish anything. Code reviews that take days. Retrospectives that change nothing. Processes that exist because they always existed, not because they help.
Reason #3: Technical Debt
Every change breaks something. Nothing is documented. The codebase fights against you instead of working with you.
Reason #4: Missing Leadership
No one knows what's supposed to happen next. Decisions are made by whoever speaks loudest. The team is moving but not toward anywhere specific.
Reason #5: The Wrong Work
The team is building features that users don't want. Or they're solving problems that don't exist. Or they're optimizing for metrics that don't matter.
The Fix Isn't More People
I've never seen a team that needed more developers. I've seen teams that needed:
Clarity. Knowing what matters and what doesn't. Having a single, prioritized list of what to work on.
Process. Not bureaucracy—just enough structure that everyone knows what's happening and what comes next.
Debt Reduction. Taking time to make the codebase easier to work with, even when it feels like a waste of time.
Leadership. Someone who can make decisions, remove blockers, and point the team in the right direction.
Focus. The freedom to work on one thing at a time without constant interruption.
When you address these issues, productivity increases without adding anyone. The team that was "underperforming" suddenly looks like they're doing great work.
A Better Framework
Before you hire anyone, run through this checklist:
-
What specifically is slow?
Not "everything." What exactly takes longer than it should? -
Why is it slow?
Is it the code? The process? The people? The priorities? -
What would happen if we fixed that first?
Can you measure before and after? -
What would a new person actually do?
If the answer is "help with everything," that's a red flag. Specific work needs specific people. -
What can we accomplish in 30 days without hiring?
Try it. You might be surprised.
When Hiring Actually Makes Sense
I'm not saying you should never hire. I'm saying you should hire for the right reasons.
Hire when:
- You have clear, prioritized work that needs more hands
- The current team is genuinely at capacity, not just struggling
- You have bandwidth to onboard and mentor new people
- The work requires skills that don't exist on the current team
- You've addressed the underlying issues that were causing slowness
Don't hire when:
- You're behind schedule and need to "make up time"
- The current team is struggling with unclear priorities
- You haven't figured out why things are slow
- You don't have time to onboard properly
What Happened to That Founder
The founder who hired four developers? He eventually figured out what I already knew.
His team wasn't understaffed. It was misdirected.
He spent two months doing what he should have done at the start: clarifying priorities, fixing the worst technical debt, and creating a process that actually worked.
The three-person team that remained was more productive than the seven-person team had ever been. Features shipped faster. Quality improved. Morale recovered.
He eventually hired again—two more developers, carefully selected, with clear work for them to do.
The difference wasn't the number of people. It was everything else.
The Bottom Line
"Just hire more developers" is easy advice to give. It's also usually wrong.
Before you add headcount, understand why you're not moving as fast as you should. Fix the problems that are actually slowing you down. Create conditions where more people would actually help.
And if, after all that, you still need more hands—then hire. But hire for the right reasons, at the right time, with clear expectations.
Your team, your runway, and your sanity will thank you.
Need Help Understanding What's Slowing Your Team Down?
At Startupbricks, we help startups identify the real blockers to productivity. Sometimes that means hiring. Often it means fixing something else entirely.
If your team is struggling and you're wondering whether hiring is the answer, let's talk through it.