Building Teams Around Talent

‍

Most startup hiring advice follows a predictable pattern. Identify a need. Write a job description. Interview candidates who fit that description. Hire the one who checks the most boxes.

This approach makes sense for established companies with defined processes and clear hierarchies. But for startups, at the seed stage, it can be a mistake. The teams that succeed often form through a different path. They find exceptional people first, then figure out how to deploy them.

Cursor has articulated this philosophy clearly: find amazing people and then build a job for them. Their process reflects this. They post names of exceptional people in their hiring channel, swarm that person with attention, and if mutual interest exists, they start on Monday. No job description. No months-long search process. Just a focus on finding people worth building around.

The case for talent-first hiring

When you're building from zero, you need people who can adapt and create value in ways you haven't anticipated. A brilliant engineer might turn out to have customer insights that reshape your product. A designer might reveal operational skills that solve a critical bottleneck. These discoveries happen when you prioritize raw capability over role specification.

This works because early-stage companies face shifting problems. The role you think you need today might be irrelevant in three months. But a smart, adaptable person will create value regardless of how your priorities change. They'll identify problems you didn't know existed and solve them before you realize they matter.

There's another advantage. When you hire this way, you signal to other talented people that you care about who they work with. Strong candidates evaluate potential colleagues as much as they evaluate the opportunity. Building a reputation for having smart people in the room becomes self-reinforcing. Each strong hire makes the next one easier.

This principle doesn't expire as you scale. Raw talent remains the foundation at every stage. What changes is the frame around it.

How the frame shifts

The talent-first approach evolves as your company grows, but it doesn't disappear. At seed stage, you're looking for raw talent that can adapt to anything. At Series A and B, you're still looking for raw talent, but now within specific domains.

The distinction matters. At five people, you need someone who can figure out whatever needs figuring out. At fifty people, you need someone who can figure things out within their domain. Both require exceptional capability as the foundation.

By Series A and B, you're developing specialized functions. You need someone who can build your sales process, not just a smart person who might figure it out. But you're not looking for any sales person with experience. You're looking for someone with raw talent who also brings pattern recognition from having built sales processes before.

This isn't about lowering your standards on talent. It's about adding context to where that talent gets applied. Domain expertise without raw capability gives you competent execution. Raw talent with domain focus gives you breakthrough performance.

The costs of getting this wrong increase with scale. At five people, you can absorb someone learning a domain while they find their fit. At fifty people, that learning curve creates confusion about priorities and resource allocation. Other employees start questioning why someone isn't delivering in their supposed area.

A leadership question

There's a factor that determines whether talent-first hiring works at any stage. Your capacity to deploy that talent matters more than the talent itself.

Some founders create environments where smart people find valuable problems to solve. They provide structure that guides without constraining. Others struggle to channel undefined talent. The result is capable people working on interesting projects that don't advance the business.

If you struggle with organizational ambiguity yourself, hiring people into undefined roles amplifies that challenge. This becomes more acute as you scale. At seed stage, everyone sees the whole business. At Series A and B, people need clearer contribution areas to coordinate with specialized teams.

The question isn't whether someone is talented. It's whether you can deploy that talent in a way that creates value for the business. Raw capability without direction produces activity, not results.

Finding the right balance

The key is matching your hiring approach to your stage while maintaining focus on talent quality.

Seed stage companies should prioritize raw talent over everything else. You're looking for people who can do whatever needs doing, who create value through adaptation rather than specialization. Culture fit matters. Domain knowledge is secondary because your domains aren't even defined yet.

As you approach Series A and B, the frame becomes more specific. You still want exceptional people, but now you need them to have developed pattern recognition in the areas you're building. Your first sales hire should be someone who has built sales processes before and can build yours better. Your first operations leader should understand operations and see opportunities others miss.

By Series C, you need raw talent with proven execution in specialized functions. You're building teams with defined responsibilities. The generalist approach that powered your seed stage creates inefficiency at this scale. But you're still looking for the best people in their field who also fit how you work.

This doesn't mean compromising on talent quality at later stages. It means looking for exceptional talent within defined domains rather than exceptional talent seeking a domain. The best Series A and B hires still think like founders. They have domain knowledge but haven't lost the ability to see beyond conventional solutions.

What founders should watch for

If you're building your hiring approach, consider three questions at any stage.

First, does this person have raw problem-solving ability? Domain expertise is valuable, but capability is fundamental. Someone who checks boxes without seeing patterns will give you average performance. Someone who sees what others miss will build something excellent.

Second, do they fit your culture and how you work? Talent without culture fit creates friction that compounds over time. The technical brilliance that seemed worth the personality conflicts at ten people becomes destructive at fifty people.

Third, have they developed relevant pattern recognition for what you need? At seed stage, this might mean general startup experience. At Series A and B, this means specific domain depth. But the question remains consistent: can they apply what they've learned to create something better than what exists?

The timeline for defining roles matters too. Hiring someone without a clear role works if you're committed to finding their fit within weeks. The longer someone operates without clear contribution areas, the more organizational friction you create. Weeks work. Months create confusion.

The bottom line

Hire for raw talent at every stage. At seed stage, that talent needs to adapt to undefined problems. At Series A and B, that talent needs depth in specific domains. At Series C, that talent needs proven execution in specialized functions.

The frame shifts, but the priority doesn't. The best people have both capability and relevant experience. Domain expertise is common. Raw talent within a domain is rare. When you find someone who has both, the decision becomes clear.