LinkedIn generalized the idea of making people’s resumes visible to anyone who wanted to see them, and today a startup hoping to do the same for companies and how they are organized and run announced some funding. Has been doing. The organization, which wants to build a global, publicly viewable database of a company’s organizational charts — and then use that database as a platform for a host of other services — has raised $20 million, money. Which it will use to hire more people, add more organization charts, and launch new features, including a recruiting toolkit that ranks first on the list.
The Series B is led by Tiger Global, with previous backers Sequoia, Founders Fund, and Balderton Capital also joining new investors Thursday Ventures, Lars Fjeldsow-Nielsen (a former Balderton partner), Niraj Arora (early WhatsApp exec), investor Gavin K. participating together. Baker, and more. From what we understand, this investment values the organization at $100 million.
The Founders Fund led the company’s final round, a Series A in February 2020, and the whole world of work has really changed a lot in the interim due to COVID-19: companies have become more distributed (the result of the closure of offices) ); The nature of businesses has changed due to new demands; Many of us have tested our understanding of our jobs in ways that we never thought would happen.
All of this has had a massive impact on the organization, and certainly played into the theory of why organization charts are useful, and most useful as a tool for transparency.
“In many ways the pandemic has forced us to re-evaluate the norms of how things work. One of the misconceptions was the idea that you’re only working when you’re in the office, 9-5. But the future of work is a hybrid set up but you get a lot of issues that arise out of it, communication is one of them. Now it’s so important to create alignment, a sense of connection, and really a sense of belonging in your company,” said Christian Vialonis, the CEO who co-founded the company with Andreas Jarbel. “We think of these. A lot of the issues are rooted around transparency and that is what the organization is all about. Who’s doing what and why?”
He said that when the coronavirus suddenly gave rise to a global issue – and it was really sudden; Our conversation in February 2020 had nothing to do with it, yet everything closed a few weeks later – it was unclear what the organization’s place in the so-called “new normal” would be.
“We were nervous like anyone else, but the idea of what the work would look like and how we enable the people around us became very high on the agenda,” he said. “The appetite for new devices has improved dramatically, and we can see that in our traffic.”
The organization has actually seen some pretty impressive growth. The company now hosts approximately 130,000 public organization charts, sees 30,000 daily visitors, and has over 120,000 registered users. There has also been a boom in more casual use. Vialonis noted that The Org now has around 1 million visitors per month, compared to only 100,000 in February 2020, when it only had 16,000 org charts on its platform.
Monetization for startups is coming slowly. It’s still free to create, edit, and officially “claim” a profile on the platform, but in the meantime the organization is working on its platform play and using the database it uses to power other services. making for. Job search is the first area it will tackle. Posting a job will be free, and it’s integrating with Greenhouse to feed information into its system, but recruiters and HR professionals are given the option to manage the sourcing and screening process through the organization, which There is one type of executive recruitment tool, which will come at a charge. There are plans for more communications and human resources tools down the line, Vialonis said. Some of this will be built through integration with other services and APIs, and some of the equipment – such as communication features – will be built in-house from the ground up.
When I covered the company’s final round, I noticed that there were some obvious barriers to The Org, as well as others providing more transparency and information about hiring and how companies run their business models. constructed. Sometimes the companies in question aren’t really want To have more transparency. And any database that is based on self-reporting runs the risk of being only as good as the data it puts into it – meaning it could be incomplete, or simply wrong, or only the best of contributors. Can be presented for profit, not the company itself. (That’s one of the issues with LinkedIn; even with people’s resumes being public, it’s still all too easy to lie about what you actually do, or have done.)
As of now, the theory is that some of this will be sorted out depending on who the organization is targeting and how it is growing. Today the company’s “sweet spot” is an early-stage startup with about 50-200 employees, and typically org charts for these businesses are created by Org itself, and then largely wiki-style user-edited content. Via (Anyone) can join with a company email).
The plan is to continue working with smaller startups as they grow, but also target larger and larger businesses. However, these can be difficult – not least because they will spread across the realm of public companies, but also because their charts will be more complex to map and manage consistently. For this reason, Org is adding more features about how companies can “claim” their profiles, including managing permissions for those who edit profiles.
This could mean more managed public profiles, but the idea is that this will be a start, and once more companies post more information, we’ll see more transparency overall, not unlike LinkedIn’s growth, Vilonis said. .
The LinkedIn analogy is interesting for another reason. It seems that LinkedIn, which at its heart is a vast database of information about the world of professional work and the people and companies involved, at some point wanted to create its own version of the organization chart. And it hasn’t happened yet.
Some of it may be down to how LinkedIn fundamentally built and organized its database and knowledge graph, but Vialonis believes it could also be a conceptual difference.
“We think this may be the fundamental difference between us and them,” Vialonis said of LinkedIn. “They are a database of resumes. ‘I can say whatever I want.’ But for us the nuclear unit is the organization. This is an important distinction because it is a one-to-many relationship. It’s only I can’t edit my profile. And allows us to build structures. “
He said this was one of the reasons why Rabois – who was an early executive at LinkedIn – became an early investor in The Org: “LinkedIn has been looking at this forever, but they haven’t been able to build it, and so that’s how we did it.” drew attention.”