When Start Ups Aren't Really Start Ups

As the economy lurches slowly down a path to recovery, it seems many in my network are considering leaving their current 'safe haven' jobs. Maybe they put up with a sub-ideal job for a few more years than they might have in the past, sticking with the devil they knew, for the sake of security. Perhaps their formerly ideal company didn't weather the downturn terribly well, and the environment has gone toxic. Maybe, they are just a few more years experienced and ready to put their skills to work for a greater challenge (and possibly: reward). What's interesting to me is the number of companies in the current hiring market that seem to be using the phrases, "start up", "reboot", "re-set", etc., when they engage with my friends in hiring discussions.

While some of these organizations in my new geography (Bay Area, California) are truly start ups, in the sense that they didn't exist a couple of  years ago, and/or they are currently in active venture funding rounds, many of these employers my friends are meeting with are what used to be considered "established" businesses- in operation for 10, 15 years or more.  Some may be truly rebuilding; like storm survivors on the Gulf Coast after Katrina. But many of these employers don't seem to be doing much that's materially different. So, what, I have to wonder, is the deal?  Why are so many companies choosing to identify as start ups when dealing with job candidates?

Is it just branding?
Have recruiting companies figured out that 'traditional' employees want the some of the glamor of start ups, without the actual risk of an unproven business model? What does that really mean, then? Lower salaries, beefed up with equity offers? More cubicles (vs. private offices)? Keeping costs low to feel 'boot strappy' while doing things more or less the same way they always have?  

Maybe it's legit.
Maybe these employers are really willing to take more risky positions, be nimbler, more innovative. There's a logic to leveraging an experienced team and established infrastructure, and if you have been through some 'pruning' in the last few years, the right strategy would likely pay off well.

How could a candidate tell the difference?  And, how much does it really matter?
My observation is that a true start up will have a very consistent message around their status as a start up.  Everyone the candidate meets will bring this up; the employee that recruits you, the hiring manager, any additional team members you interview with will express at least some evangelical zeal about their collective efforts to do something audacious.  They will direct you to press releases about their product or their funding successes. 

And that's another 'tell' that a company is truly a start up with potential.  That there IS some press, and it's not all generated by their own marketing department.  Financial reports, industry news- someone should have taken notice of what is going on in this company.  If job seekers are not getting a consistent start up message from everyone they engage with, and if no one outside the company has noticed anything new or different, then this prospective employer has a potentially dangerous inner narrative problem.  Not a deal breaker, necessarily, but candidates should try to determine the source of the disconnect.  Is it a recruiter who is having problems getting people to talk to him about a staid or unknown brand name?  Is it a hiring manager who not-so-secretly wishes she was at a start up, and is trying to inject some hyper ambition into her team?  Neither of these are bad motives, if the candidate realizes what is going on, and makes an informed decision before signing on. 

If a job seeker cannot determine the source of the inconsistency, then one possibility is that the leadership team is motivated to attract hard working talent at a lower salary, take extreme advantage of their contributions and then sell the enterprise, reaping significant benefits to the Leadership team while leaving the same hard-working talent back on the job market.  This is simply how Capitalism works, and everyone has an opportunity to succeed in this model, just as they have an opportunity to be very unpleasantly surprised by it.  Even in this scenario, job seekers don't have to walk away.  If the work is something that brings you joy, or gives you experience in something directly related to your career goals, there's no reason not to go along for the ride.  Just be aware it could be short, or bumpy, and have your parachute packed.  There will come a time you'll need to exit the craft.  If you negotiated for some equity shares to offset that start up salary, you will be in the right position for the next career adventure.