Dominik Nitsch's Linkedin Analytics

If you put a polar bear into the savannah, it dies.  If you put a human from the savannah into the Siberian forest, it survives. Animals are specialists. They thrive in one environment and outperform every other species there. But as soon as they leave their environment, they struggle to survive.  Humans are generalists. We adapt to new circumstances, and while we’ll never be suited for one environment perfectly, we’ve found means to survive even in the strangest of places. Some humans enjoy living in the hinterlands of Yakutsk (interesting video below), others thrive in the deserts of Kuwait. But if you swapped humans from these two places, they’d be okay. It’d suck, but they would learn, adapt, overcome. Being generalists is, in a way, what got us all the way where we are today.  And yet, educational systems and sketchy “career advisors” push us to specialize in one discipline only. F**k that.  The best ideas develop at the intersection of disciplines.  The best founders bring a unique combination of skills to the table.  The best athletes come from multi-sport backgrounds, not specialized academies. I always thought being a generalist without a specialization was a weakness. It’s not.  It’s the secret weapon of the 21st century.

If you had to choose between a MacBook and a Dell laptop, what would you choose? (This post is not about laptops.) Based on my personal observations in most Berlin coworking spaces, >90% of people would answer “a space grey MacBook”. Why is that?  Aren’t Dell laptops often superior in terms of features? Let’s take a look at how they sell: Apple: “Think different. For the creatives, the dreamers, the misfits.”  Dell: “Intel Core i7. 16GB RAM. Anti-glare display. Long battery life.” One is a list of features.  The other tells a story. Stories sell. So why do 99% of CVs and job descriptions read list a list of features? CVs:  “Managed 900k budget.”  “Optimized operational workflows.” “Conducted client due diligence.” → This tells me nothing about who you are. Job Descriptions:  “2+ years of experience in consulting, banking, or startups” “Hold a Bachelor’s degree” “Strong Excel skills.” → Neither does this. Both CVs and JDs are supposed to sell. What kind of selling is this s**t? It’s s**t because it’s constrained to a few bullet points. But there’s always more to the story. And next Wednesday, I’m giving Berlin- or Munich-based founders the opportunity to tell their story to ~20 highly qualified business generalists, looking to work as Founder’s Associate or Chief of Staff right now. So your company can be the MacBook, not the Dell laptop. DM me to secure your spot today (2 are still open). PS: Want to see what a job description looks like that tells a story? Check out the one Jan Mundin wrote for Buena (link in comments). The best I’ve seen in months.

A mental model I can’t stop thinking about: Thermometer vs. Thermostat theory. Some people have this uncanny ability to light up the room when they enter. (@kaihuebner is such a person.) They’re thermostats: they’re setting the temperature. But most people are thermometers: they simply reflect the temperature around them.  → if energy is high, they go with the flow → if energy is low, they don’t do anything to change it At any given point, you can choose to be a thermometer or a thermostat.  An energy taker, or an energy giver. When in doubt, choose to be the thermostat.

Generalists dread this question: "What do you do?". A 5-step framework to nail the answer every single time: You're at Christmas dinner with your aunts and uncles. Rest assured, someone will ask: "What do you do these days?". "Uh, I work in startups." C'mon man, you're selling yourself short, you instantly think to yourself. You're so much more than just a dude or girl that works in startups. You're a multi-faceted, nuanced human being. Let's fix that. Here's the framework: 1) List ALL your activities → Full-time work, side hustles, serious interests, everything → Don't filter. Be comprehensive. 2) Identify the common thread → What unites these seemingly disparate pursuits? → For me, it's "empowerment" - helping others unlock potential 3) Find your unique angle → What makes your combination truly special? → This is your competitive advantage as a generalist 4) Structure with the Pyramid Principle → Start with your core message → Support with 2-3 specific examples → Allow people to dig deeper if interested 5) Create a simplified version → Craft a non-pretentious one-liner for everyday use → Bonus: ask the LLM of your choice to explain it to a 5-year old When I applied this process, I went from awkward stammering to confidently saying: "I run a recruiting company for generalists, write a weekly newsletter, and play high-level Lacrosse—all with the goal of helping others succeed." So ... what do you do? Leave your answer in the comments. PS: I wrote a deep dive into this a few months ago. Read it here: https://lnkd.in/exJJQApe

Want a higher salary? Increase your market value.  7 ways to build market value: -- If this was useful, consider following me on LinkedIn and joining my newsletter. I'm Dominik, and I help business generalists build their career in early-stage startups. If that's you, we'll get along.

My first company placed >400 Italian nurses in German hospitals, full-service. Here’s how we succeeded in a crowded market: There are literally hundreds, if not thousands of agencies out there who do the exact same thing: recruiting nursing personnel from abroad. And yet, we managed to sign some of Germany’s most renowned hospitals and continue to work with them. How? We executed better than anybody else. We identified two critical issues with all the existing players, and went above and beyond to resolve them. Today, I run another recruiting business. People look at me like I’m insane – why would you do that when there’s so much competition? Because in entrepreneurship, you have to pick your poison. Every market is either: → too small → too crowded → too complex I like crowded markets. Because you can win in them by executing relentlessly for a long amount of time. How do you do that? And what were the two critical issues that we identified? I recently wrote a deep dive on this in my newsletter. Read it here: https://lnkd.in/ekYcdBiC

The average knowledge worker only works productively for 2:23h per day. Here’s how the top 10% are outperforming you: - They understand which activities move the needle and prioritize those ruthlessly - When they say yes to meetings, they keep them short and show up prepared - They pay attention to their exercise, nutrition, and sleep regimen - They are experts in using the tools they work with regularly - They know when they work best, and protect that time - They tackle the hardest task first thing in the morning - They don’t check social media during their work time - They set aside time blocks for focused work daily - They set clear quarterly, weekly, and daily goals - They plan their day and tasks the night before - They know how to get in the zone quickly - They eliminate distractions around them - They sit down and simply do the work - They say no to unnecessary meetings - They measure their input and output Don’t waste 6 hours per day.  Crush your day instead, and use the remaining time to live your life. How to do all this: https://lnkd.in/eTFQX9mJ

Anyone know where the "unsubscribe" button is? Thought it was weird that I continue receiving magazines I never asked for. But because I also hate people who complain without taking action, I found it for you: https://lnkd.in/eT4Uz4iK

Old way: - Go to university to get BSc & MSc  - Become highly specialized - Work in consulting, IB, big corporate, scaleup - Work 50+ hours / week for someone else - Switch jobs every few years - Retire in your 60s New way:  - Build a portfolio career and diversify income streams - Become a jack of all trades, master of some - Treat yourself as the CEO of you  - Understand that you are the most valuable asset you own, and invest as much as you can in yourself  - Build a business to fit your lifestyle, not the other way around - Do mini-retirements every few years Building your own career > perceived job safety from full-time jobs.

One skill all successful generalists have in common:  They manage their time & energy well. In 2014, I realized that in order to do all the things I wanted to do, I needed more time. So I spent years researching the best productivity techniques, completely revamped my structure several times and read north of 50 books about that topic. In 2024, it finally all came together:  → bootstrapping a startup → writing a weekly newsletter → training 10+ hours a week → while maintaining a healthy social life → fantastic mental & physical health It took me ten years to figure this shit out. And last year, I've condensed everything I've learned into an online course that takes less than three hours. It launched exactly six months ago. To celebrate it's 0.5th birthday, I'm running a promotion until Sunday, April 20th: 45% off using the code SIXMONTHS.  (Would like to give you 50%, but I promised at launch that I'm never going to discount it as much again.) So if you: → feel frazzled after a day of work → don't have the time to pursue hobbies or side hustles anymore → want to spend more quality time with friends & family ... then this course is for you. Start reclaiming your time today: https://lnkd.in/eTFQX9mJ PS: If you don't like it – you get your money back (within 30 days). No questions asked.

One visual every founder needs to understand:  The Dunning Kruger-Effect. When you first get a business idea, you know nothing. Then you start dreaming, planning, calculating potential profits. Suddenly you're convinced: this is the next unicorn. Congratulations. You've just climbed Mount Stupid. I witnessed this firsthand during my time at Entrepreneur First. Fifty ambitious founders with 12 weeks to find a co-founder, validate a business idea, and secure investment at a €1M valuation. The ideas were fascinating: AI-powered personal trainers, brown algae farms, wearables for seniors. All brilliant at first. But at closer look ... not so much. You will reach the peak of Mount Stupid at some point in your journey. What matters is that you get down as fast as possible. Here's how to descend Mount Stupid faster than your competition: 1) Customer Development → The biggest flex at EF wasn't a nice slide deck – it was "I did 25 customer interviews last week" → Reality hits differently when you talk to actual humans → Read "The Mom Test" by Rob Fitzpatrick (mandatory) 2) Competitive Research  → If you think "nobody else is doing this," you're either building something worthless or you haven't looked hard enough → When I started Generalyst, a competitor doing the exact same thing launched around the same time → Initially frustrating? F**k yeah. But they also did validate the market for free. 3) Rapid Hypothesis Invalidation → List ALL your assumptions (even the "obvious" ones) → Formulate them as hypotheses you can test → Systematically try to prove yourself wrong The truth? Whatever you're building, someone's already tried it. Accepting this is the first step down from Mount Stupid. Entrepreneurship isn't about protecting your ego, it's about facing reality. The sooner you have those uncomfortable conversations, the faster you'll build something that actually works. And after the descent? The next climb begins. But this time, you're climbing with knowledge, not just enthusiasm. PS: Veteran mountaineer Ed Viesturs says: "Getting to the top is optional. Getting down is mandatory." Also applies to entrepreneurship.

What people think running a recruiting company is like: forward a few CVs → make a ton of money.  What running a recruiting company is ACTUALLY like: → Identify at least three different channels to source candidates  → Build customized landing pages for different audiences → Create an application form with custom questions → Sift through 100s of CVs & free text fields  → Select the best CVs to be interviewed  → Schedule 20+ interviews weekly  → Execute said interviews  → Select the best profiles  → Summarize them   → Send out CVs  → Follow up  → Wait  → Have the candidates accept a different offer due to a slow process → Reframe criteria as founders changed their mind → Go through the candidate database again → Find the perfect candidate for them → “didn’t go to the right university” → Have the candidate rejected  → Source new candidates → From the right college  → Interview them  → They are great  → Send out CVs → Follow up → Wait  → Company makes low-ball offer  → Candidate is pissed  → Renegotiate offer  → Get a new one  → Both sign  → Profit This shit ain’t for the faint of heart. But the feeling you get when you help a company and a candidate find the perfect fit w/ each other … that gets me out of bed every morning.  Time is too valuable to waste it in a job you don’t like, or hiring people that aren’t a fit. A great fit can accelerate growth 10X – both for company & candidate.  It’s finding this fit that is the challenge. And that’s why I believe recruiting companies have a right to exist.

“The difference between greatness and mediocrity isn’t in the spectacular moments but rather in avoiding critical errors.” — Shane Parrish Warren Buffett's first rule of investing? Never lose money. His second rule? Never forget rule one. This isn't clever wordplay - it's the mathematics of success. A 50% loss demands a 100% gain to break even. Or look at elite athletes: while average quarterbacks mix brilliant throws with costly interceptions, Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes protect the ball first. For Lacrosse defenders, fans look for the hard hits, fancy takeaway checks, and high-risk double teams. Coaches look for:  → accurate positioning → loud, constant communication → rock-solid footwork  → proper passing & groundball technique The best defense is the one that makes no critical mistakes, not the one that makes fancy plays. In business, most people look for high funding rounds, quick hacks, and eccentric founders. Whereas most successful businesses have:  → solid profit margins → a legitimate problem that they solve well  → people who genuinely enjoy going to work  → a hiring process that avoids mis-hires Let’s wrap it up with another quote from Shane: “Excellence isn’t about occasional brilliance – it’s about consistent execution.” Photo cred: Rebecca Fällenbacher

The best essay I've read in the last 12 months: High Agency by George Mack. "Who would you call to break you out of a third world jail cell?" That person has a certain … something. A combination of abilities that helps them find solutions to basically any problem. That’s agency. George Mack breaks it down into 5 “lines of code”:  (1) There’s no unsolvable problem: if it doesn’t defy the laws of physics, it’s solvable. We just haven’t found a way yet. (2)There’s no “one” way to success: there are some techniques that work better than others, but you still have to figure out your own way. What worked for others doesn’t necessarily work for you. (3)There are no “adults”. Even the greatest are deeply human and make stupid mistakes. (4) There’s no “normal”. If you try and fit in, you’ll be forgotten. If you are your unique self, you stand out – and that’s a good thing. (5) There’s only now. The past no longer exists, the future doesn’t yet. Focus on the here and now. Once you see those 5 principles, you can never unsee them. This is just scratching the surface. You gotta read the entire essay: www.highagency.com In fact, I've already shared this with 20+ people privately, and my ~700 newsletter subscribers. Everybody loved it. An entrepreneur friend: "Insane essay. Gives you another lens to look at life. Thanks for sharing." The 18-year old from my Lacrosse club: "What a marvelous essay. Forget stoicism or sigma mentality [sic], from now on I'm striving for high agency." (Henrike, maybe you can help here – what's sigma mentality? 😂) PS: I also shared how I've applied learnings from the essay in Monday's newsletter – read it here: https://lnkd.in/edrBcGgY

Most people don’t quit because they lack discipline. They quit because they chase the wrong thing. They’re in love with the end result (six-pack abs, a profitable business, a photo at the peak of Everest), but they don’t enjoy the process of getting there. A profitable business? → months, if not years, of rejection, pivots, and cold outreach A loving relationship? → plenty of hard conversations & healthy fights A healthy body? → years of grueling workouts that make you question your life choices Think of it like hiking. We don’t go on a hike to reach a particular place – that’s not the objective.  We go on a hike to spend time in nature. It’s the journey, not the destination. And while the destination might be attractive (ie. a fantastic view like this one in Torres del Paine, Chile), to get there, you need to love the process. The best way to outcompete everybody else in your market: do ordinary things for an extraordinary amount of time. And to do that, you need to love the ordinary things.

After asking 150+ candidates "What have you achieved that others couldn't have?", I've noticed something fascinating: Senior executives with 25-year careers, who've managed 8-figure budgets and quadrupled company revenues, beam with pride about... building their own camper van or DIY home renovations. Intriguing.  No matter what they've achieved professionally, the things they're truly proud of are things they've created. Which makes sense: Creation is the ultimate form of human achievement. 1) Creation trumps consumption → When basic needs are met, humans naturally gravitate toward making things with their own hands → The most successful people (Naval Ravikant, Rick Rubin, Marcus Aurelius) all pivot to creation once they've "made it" 2) Creation passes the "earned-status test" → Could the richest person in the world have this tomorrow? No. → A billionaire can buy a pool, but can't experience the pride of building one themselves 3) Creation requires intentional time allocation → Most people fall into the "when-trap" ("when I retire, when I have more time") → Work and chores will always expand to fill available time unless you specifically carve out creation time 4) Creation builds lasting fulfillment → It expresses autonomy, legacy, and identity → It provides purpose that money alone cannot buy This resonates. Right now, I sit down every day at 8am and write first thing in the morning. Does it make me money? No.  But it gives me something no salary increase could: purpose. Right now, if you asked me what my proudest achievement is, it'd probably related to sports. Ten years from now, I project that it'll be related to creation: the business building and/or writing that I've done. What will you create this week? PS: Creation is also a powerful antidote to hedonism - it's much harder to party every night when you have something meaningful to wake up for. PPS: If this resonates with you, I'd love to hear what you're creating. Leave a comment below!

I switched my newsletter from Substack to ConvertKit (now: Kit) & Ghost one year ago. If you're writing a newsletter or considering starting one, this is for you: One year ago, the main reasons for switching were:  → terrible SEO (62 views in 1 year from Google) → limited customization → no custom sequences → no API One year later, all of this is working well: → Traffic from Google has increased by 460% (~25 monthly views from Google, but hey, it’s something) → My website is now nicely customized (take a look: https://lnkd.in/eAUr-wa9)  → I have four different welcome sequences for subscribers depending on where they come from  → The #1 growth channel are applicants to Generalyst (who also fit the ICP of the newsletter!) — this would be a pain in the ass without APIs (and the lack of welcome emails ... and the missing sequencing ... and no customizable targeting) I’m happy with the switch, but I do miss a few things about Substack: → Referrals: readers can refer someone to your newsletter and get something in return (eg. for 1 successful referral, you receive a free PDF, for 5, you receive a shirt etc.). Kit has this capability, but it’s 2000€/year and I’m not ready yet to drop this kinda money. (Nathan Barry, anything we could do about that?) → Comments: on Substack, you can easily comment on and interact with posts. In my current architecture, that’s not possible, thus potentially depriving me from reader feedback. → Lack of integration between recommendations: some newsletters I’d love to recommend I can’t because they’re on different platforms (looking at you, Anna Mackenzie). This is a general problem in the newsletter space. Now, every platform promises rapid growth when you use their tool, so let’s take a look at the numbers: → I migrated 330 Subscribers over to Kit → Today, I have 714, so 384 or 116% more → 29% of these (112) came from the Kit Creator Network (mostly thanks to Vassilena, who kept sending people my way like the all star that she is) That’s solid. Not the kinda growth that gets you featured on Chenell Basilio’s newsletter, but it goes to show that consistent effort goes a long way. I’d much rather have 714 subscribers than to start out with zero again. Considering starting your own newsletter? AMA in the comments. — Join my newsletter here: https://lnkd.in/eNkx-7yn  Gotten curious about Kit? Here’s my referral link: https://lnkd.in/ei58gYrA

Most CVs:  → read like a feature description → exclusively focus on professional experience → present the candidate like a tool, not a person The best CVs: → tell a story  → give texture to the person  → include personal experiences You’re hiring a full person, not just their professional experience. Recently heard that career coaches recommend EXCLUDING personal experience and only focusing on professional experience. I honestly could not disagree more. That's just bad advice. I've never played Lacrosse professionally, but the learnings from playing against the best in the world (see photo below) definitely translate to my professional competencies. If I excluded that from my CV, a hiring manager would definitely not get the full picture. Present yourself as the person that you are, not as a accumulation of whichever jobs you've done.

Years-long expertise is overrated in early-stage startups. Most tasks on the business side don’t require experts. They require the meta skills of “working well”, and then a few intense days of deep dives into a specific topic. It takes 20 hours of dedicated practice to get reasonably good at most skills (search “The First 20 Hours” on YouTube) if you follow this 4-step process: (1) Deconstruct the topic → Get a high-level overview of what skills the topic entails, then pick the ones that appear to have the most leverage. (2) Learn enough to self-correct → Study the bare minimum (for most topics, reading 3 different books or taking one online course should do the trick) to self-correct. This means that you don’t need external help to tell you when something’s wrong. (3) Remove barriers to practice  → Acquire the resources, and eliminate distractions. You know the drill. (4) Do the thing for 20 hours → Practice / study for 20 hours. When I first joined Sdui in early 2021, I knew absolutely nothing about EdTech and very little about the German school system. This was my approach: → I broke it down into theoretical (ie. Reading articles) and practical (ie. Talking to people) aspects  → Spent 2 days studying the main aspects and challenges based on internet research → Put together a list of 15 people I could talk to and blocked my calendar → Spent 30-60 minutes with each of these people, peppering them with questions Within 2 weeks, I had a pretty good understanding of what the educational system and the current EdTech ecosystem looks like. So whenever you publish a job post, or see a job post, that requires specific domain expertise, think again – isn’t this something that one could acquire within a few weeks? And early on in a startup, when you still might be pivoting, who’s better for your challenge? A specialist? Or a generalist? PS: If you really need specialist knowledge, go hire them for a few weeks and internalize all the knowledge. PPS: If this resonates, at any given point, my company has a talent pool of highly qualified, driven, exceptional generalists ready to work right now in Germany. Want to get to know them to boost your startup's growth? Send me a DM. 🤝

Who are you really competing against? When I traveled to Stockholm last year, I noticed something odd about the pricing of the Arlanda Express - a high-speed train that takes you from the airport to the city center in ~20 minutes. Here’s the price list. Can you spot it? […] A ticket for an additional person only costs SEK 100 - less than one third of the price for a single ticket. Why is that? The answer: Arlanda Express isn’t competing against the low-cost option of taking a bus to the city center. They’re competing against Taxis. If you’re a group of 4, it’s economically more feasible to take a taxi than the train. With this pricing, it’s not. They identified their competition, and priced accordingly. Thought that was worth sharing.