yFactorial is a small software development shop. How small? One person, me. So why is the word “we” plastered all over the website and blog? I strongly subscribe to the notion that you shouldn’t try to present a company as being more than it really is, yet here I am using “we” when I should be speaking in the first person.
The truth of the matter is that it’s tough admitting to the world that your company is but one person. There’s a vulnerability associated with singularity in the business world and that’s always in the back of my mind as I craft these monologues. But, this misdirection of the word “we” directly conflicts with the transparency I’m trying to establish on The Naked Company blog. And so, it must go.
After all, I would much rather have my clients know up front that they are dealing with me, the person, than having to explain to them later that the impression I directly conveyed in the company literature is inaccurate.
Do I want yFactorial to grow beyond one person? Absolutely. But until that day comes the word “we” shall not be uttered.
slicematt said
Congrats on the new company Ryan and good luck!
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
ryan said
Thanks Matt - and thanks for making it so cheap to get up and running with my own Rails VPS!
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Ian Fieldhouse said
Congratulations Ryan. As someone who is considering making the move to 'Freelance Freedom' I look forward to hearing of your ups and downs as your business grows. Good luck!
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Jordan Glasner said
If you're planning on staying a one person shop for long, I'd change up the verbiage. You could/should have a strong brand built around the fact the client will be working w/ the owner and not just another programmer in a cubicle. The fact they're working w/ a core contributor should make it an even easier sell. By the way, I'm looking forward to your transparent posts.. I've been tossing over the idea in my head, and keep leaning towards the route you're taking.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Lee Ourand said
Congratulations Ryan. You really are an inspiration to me to keep chugging through scool. I'm hoping one day I can be "the man" enough to what you have done. Congrats again, and good luck to you on this new endeavor.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Tony Stubblebine said
Congrats on going solo! I agree with what Jordan says about changing the verbiage. I was in the same boat and remember having to fight the same urges. It ended up being a benefit to be known as a one-person shop. People tend to be more impressed with the work that you put out, and also more forgiving. A few months ago TechCrunch called me a one-man-Ning, which is a lot kinder than they would have been if I was posing as a full team. Let people know that you're a beast rather than sharing the credit with imaginary people.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
ryan said
Great tips, guys. I am mulling over how to present yFactorial as the business face of 'Ryan' without tying the two too closely together. I'm a big believer in branding and want the yFactorial brand to, someday, stand alone. Lee - thanks a lot man! Your compliments are too generous. I hope life, and school, is treating you well!
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
deman said
Hi Ryan, I'm thinking of joining the freelance world, but for now still don't have the courage.. and maybe skills. However, it always awe me reading blog of developer going to freelance freedom. Surely I'll always visit your blog to gain aspiration (.. already in my google reader). Good luck!
Thursday, September 06, 2007
James Jeffers said
You are the big toe for all of us Rubinistas in the Triangle.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
ryan said
"We" and "Us" have now been purged - thanks for the motivational support, guys.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Evan said
More power to you, Ryan. I hope to do something similar one of these days...
Friday, September 07, 2007
Jeremy said
I appreciate the openness with which you're treating this question of how to characterize your business. In my opinion, I think most people are used to this idea that, as a business entity, the proper pronoun is "we", because you're making a distinction between your personal identity and your business identity. Whether this distinction is honest depends on the situation, I suppose, but I salute you for tending towards openness. Merely asking this question to your audience and clients shows that you care about creating a business that is as transparent as humanly possible.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
Andy Stewart said
One can always use the royal we. It works for the Queen.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Graeme Mathieson said
I have deliberately kept with 'we', despite it being mainly me that does all the work. I've even gone as far as to giving the impression that there's a team of three. The other two are my wife (who does occasionally provide some moral support) and father in law (who supported us financially while I was getting started). However, there is an element of 'we' in the operation. A number of my clients are worried about me being run over by a bus, or otherwise incapacitated. They find that to be a major risk when working with a one-man operation. So I have a reciprocal agreement with (currently just one) other companies such that one can take over emergency maintenance for others if there's a catastrphic event. So, in a sense, I am "we". And saying "we" provides some subtle reassurance to my clients that's the case. I also am "we" when required. When I get in a big project, I go hire other freelancers to work along with me. So, Rubaidh (the company) can have a team of 6 if you need, but it's agile enough to only have to support me. :-)
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Ryan Thompson said
I recently started my own rails (among other things) consultancy as well and I found this article very interesting. Personally, I use several sub-contractors (developers, designers, seos, etc) on a regular basis. That we have chose to arrange ourselves in this way is really just a matter of taste and the fact that the work usually comes through me. I believe this justifies the use of 'We' as the network is definitely more than the sum of it's parts. Good article and I look forward to following your efforts.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Eric Davis said
I felt the same as you. "We" sounds more official but I have had many people talk to me and are surprised that I am a one person shop. All of them sounded comforted by the fact they I can make a decision and don't have to ask permission from "the boss" first.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
linoj said
I disagree. You should use "we" and feel uncomfortable about it. You may be the "principal" of your company but in addition to your own time, inevitably you manage and rely upon other resources: ISPs, designers, subcontractors, etc. "We" refers to the whole business. That is, unless, you just want to be viewed as a single person contractor with a resume and a keyboard. Nothing wrong with that either.
Saturday, September 15, 2007
linoj said
oops, that was supposed to read, "and NOT feel uncomfortable about it" hehe
Saturday, September 15, 2007
Peter Duijnstee said
I was mulling over the same problem recently for my own site. In the end I decided on avoiding the whole hornets nest. I tried to rephrase those lines wherever possible and in the few leftover cases I ended up referring to myself in the third person.. I.e. instead of 'We are something', 'Commuun is something'.. Whether or not that's obfuscating the truth any less I don't know. Also kudos on trying to build a brand on honesty rather than hot air Ryan, and good luck! I have a feeling you may need it ;)
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Geof Harries said
Seeing as you've opened a corporation in effect you really are a "we". You work for, and likely are paid by, yFactorial, LLC. Therefore, we is an appropriate term, no matter how cliche. I struggle with the same question so have chosen to always refer to the company - Subvert will do this, Subvert will do that - in my communications.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
brittany said
http://sodesigns.com/powerofspirit/viewtopic.php?p=3395
Tuesday, October 02, 2007