My childhood was filled with playing Sega Genesis games in the living room with my brother. A standout game was General Chaos, a satirical action-strategy game. It offered a simplified take on real-time strategy, set in the classic Red vs. Blue era. Players chose squads of five soldiers, each with unique roles: Gunner, Launcher, Chucker, Scorcher, and Blaster. There was also a fifth option, the Commando squad, which had only two soldiers but combined various skills.

As a kid, I couldn’t fathom why anyone would choose two soldiers over five. Then, one day, I accidentally picked the Commandos team while playing solo—and was amazed by the results. I performed far better with the two-man team. With fewer soldiers to manage, I could switch seamlessly between them, outmaneuvering the larger squad with ease.

This lesson in General Chaos carried through in my craft as a designer; taking pride in the ability to do more with less. Though the word “small” might be relative to where you work, let’s discuss why having smaller teams is often more effective.

Requirements for small teams

You can’t simply shrink a team and expect the same outcomes as before. Smaller teams aren’t defined by having less work or diminished impact; in reality, they often shoulder more responsibility and operate in higher-stakes environments. Their success hinges on different dynamics, emphasizing talent, trust, adaptability, and experience in ways that large teams cannot replicate.

High talent density
Smaller teams thrive when every member is highly skilled and contributes meaningfully. The phrase “a chain is only as strong as its weakest link” perfectly illustrates why talent density is critical. In a small team, every individual has a larger proportional impact on the group’s success. There’s less room for mediocrity because even one underperforming team member can create bottlenecks or compromise outcomes.

However, high talent density doesn’t just mean hiring the most senior or experienced professionals—it’s about identifying individuals who excel in their craft and can operate autonomously while collaborating effectively. For example, companies like Replit have shown that even their interns can outperform senior designers at other organizations, showcasing how talent is not strictly tied to tenure. Smaller teams prioritize excellence at all levels, ensuring that each person adds unique value, whether they’re a generalist or specialist.

Depth and range in skills
Small teams are often required to do more with less, making versatility a key trait of their members. They frequently consist of “T-shaped” professionals who combine deep expertise in one or two areas with a broad understanding of complementary skills. This adaptability allows team members to step outside their primary roles when necessary, tackling challenges creatively and efficiently.

For instance, a designer on a small team might also contribute to product strategy or marketing efforts, while a developer might dabble in customer support or user research. This blending of roles isn’t just a necessity—it becomes a strength. By having a range of skills within a team, smaller groups can respond more dynamically to changing priorities, ensuring that no task gets siloed or overlooked. In contrast, larger teams often suffer from fragmentation, where work is compartmentalized, and collaboration can become clunky or slow.

Craft experience
Experience is another key factor that gives smaller teams an edge. In high-stakes environments, such as the military, smaller elite units like U.S. Navy SEALs rely on deeply experienced individuals who can adapt to unpredictable conditions. SEAL teams often include members in their 30s or 40s—older than the average service member—because their accumulated knowledge enables them to make sound decisions in complex, high-pressure scenarios.

Similarly, in a professional setting, individuals with deep experience in their craft bring invaluable judgment to a small team. They can anticipate challenges, draw from past lessons, and make quick decisions that steer the team in the right direction. While age doesn’t necessarily equate to expertise, it’s the depth and breadth of experience that matters. This type of insight allows smaller teams to be agile and resilient, even when operating under tight constraints or with limited resources.

High trust
Perhaps the most critical ingredient for the success of small teams is trust. When there are fewer people, each person’s contributions become more visible and significant. This creates an environment where accountability and reliability are paramount. Team members must have absolute confidence in each other’s ability to deliver, knowing that their collective success hinges on mutual trust.

High trust allows smaller teams to move faster and make decisions with confidence. Instead of second-guessing each other or engaging in bureaucratic processes, they rely on open communication and shared goals. This contrasts with larger teams, where misalignment, unclear expectations, or lack of accountability can lead to inefficiencies and conflict. In smaller teams, trust fosters collaboration, streamlines workflows, and ensures that everyone feels empowered to take ownership of their work.

Capabilities

If you have the requirements for successful small teams, it unlocks a lot of impactful work. Whether you’re leading one or part of a small team, there is much to be gained from the capabilities they bring.

Reduced dependencies
The first is smaller teams also reduce dependencies. A small team is like a machine with fewer gears. It requires less oversight to move. Because of the range each person had, they’re able to reduce the number of moving parts. An engineer who can do front and back end requires less help the same way a designer who can code their own prototypes.

Increased quality and velocity
With the reduced dependencies throughout the process, small teams are able to increase the velocity of their work. Though velocity alone doesn’t guarantee quality, it gives you more shots on goal to iterate.

Increased ownership and accountability
Small teams inherently foster a culture of ownership and accountability. With fewer people involved, each individual has a clearer understanding of their role and its direct impact on the team’s outcomes. This sense of responsibility motivates team members to take pride in their work, make thoughtful decisions, and ensure high standards of quality. Additionally, because there are fewer layers of communication or approval, small teams encourage faster feedback loops and empower individuals to act with autonomy. This heightened sense of ownership not only drives better performance but also creates a more engaged and motivated team environment.

Leveraging small teams

Depending on the company, the concept of small teams might take different forms. For example, an early-stage startup is (hopefully) a small team by default. However, larger companies also deploy smaller teams. There are a few use cases where small teams excel:

• Technology investigation: When you need to explore a new material or process. For me, this was mobile and now AI.

• New 0-to-1 initiatives: High-stakes bets you need to make while de-risking.

• Rapid prototyping and experimentation: When speed matters, small teams are ideal for quickly building and testing new ideas without the overhead of larger groups. Their agility allows for fast iterations, helping you refine or pivot based on early feedback.

• Crisis response or problem-solving: Small teams are highly effective in tackling urgent or mission-critical problems. Their ability to work quickly, make decisions independently, and stay focused makes them ideal for situations that require immediate attention.

• Cross-functional alignment projects: When bridging gaps between departments (e.g., design, engineering, and product), small teams can foster tight collaboration and ensure everyone is aligned around a shared goal.

From blitzscaling to fitscaling

Blitzscaling was a business strategy coined by Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn and partner at Greylock. The 2010s were about growth at all costs while raising heavy capital to do so. This era ended in 2021-2022 with the mass layoffs in the industry and rise of AI. The blitzscale era messed up a lot of things, but now that tech has hit the factory reset button, we can take a fresh lens. It might been what was needed at the time, but not anymore. I believe the rest of the 2020s will be focused on Fitscaling.

Now more than ever, we’re able to do more with less. At Replit, we’d describe our customers as the Fortune 5,000,000 over the traditional 500. This doesn’t mean larger teams will go away. Claire Vo, CPO at Launch Darkly, talks about how her role is to help larger companies work more like a startup.

This is the philosophy I’ve taken to the AI Design team at my new company. Instead of the reaction of, “We need more resources and people,” we ask, “Are there any missing capabilities on our team? If so, how can we invest in our own team before adding additional overhead?”

The allure is not longer, “look how large my team is,” it is, “look how effective this team is.”

Hyperlinks + notes

• Email update to career advisors – Posted this on my blog so it’s available to everyone

• Replit Assistant

• Apple Intelligence in iOS 18.2: A Deep Dive into Working with Siri and ChatGPT, Together

• Congrats on matrimony,

  Molly Mielke