Chance encounters: Steve LeVine on how Big Tech companies rely on spontaneity to fuel innovation

Sometimes the next big thing begins with a casual invitation to “talk more over smoothies.” In his July 13, 2020 essay, Steve LeVine explains how this kind of unscripted, casual, in-person networking drove the development of Silicon Valley companies like Facebook and Google. LeVine asks, though, if this reliance on spontaneity, jeopardized now by work-from-home orders, is something that could—or should—be saved.

Steve LeVine, "How Remote Work Could Destroy Silicon Valley," Marker, 13 July 2020

 

1. Levine argues that “serendipity,” fueled by in-person “chance encounters,” drives the success of Big Tech companies headquartered in Silicon Valley. What evidence does he give to support this claim? How do Big Tech companies design their work environments to cultivate serendipity? According to LeVine, what three factors threaten Silicon Valley’s reliance on serendipity produced by physical proximity? Which “threats” does he focus on in his argument? Which ones might need further explanation or evidence?
   
2. The argument made by the title of LeVine’s essay—that working from home could “destroy” the success of Silicon Valley—is provocative, yet the rest of his essay presents a more even tone. Why do you think he makes this choice? When might it be useful for a writer to adopt a neutral tone? Locate one of the naysayer arguments he presents, and explain how he introduces and responds to this counterargument. How accurately does he summarize the naysayer perspective? What concessions does he make? What voice markers from Chapter 5 does he use so that readers can clearly tell who is saying what?
3. LeVine argues that Silicon Valley’s “dearth of diversity” can be traced in part to who has access to serendipitous moments. Why is serendipity “much harder to come by” for women and people of color, according to LeVine? What examples does he give? What other groups of people have limited access to the intense, in-person collaborative work that seems to be required in “classic” Silicon Valley? What do you think are the effects of this structural bias for Big Tech companies and the products they make?
4. Serendipity is important beyond Silicon Valley. One place where it matters, some would argue, is in the classroom. How do you think serendipitous encounters and in-person collaboration affect learning? Think about your experience doing schoolwork remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic, and read this op-ed from high school teacher Jeremy Adams, who writes about losing the “magic of the classroom” during the pandemic. Do you agree or disagree with Adams? Why or why not? LeVine is optimistic that serendipity can be “digitized” through the development of better online tools. What’s your take on this claim, based on your experience as a student during this pandemic?

Comments

[Miriam]

Serendipity offers the right opportunity, besides there's another saying that 'opportunity are only reserved for those prepared'.

[Jan]

I think that Steve LeVine is making a thoughtful point in his article. I have never considered serendipity as a major factor of success. Furthermore, I have never thought that companies make innovations in order to make luck go their way. There is no doubt that one needs to help their own luck, but I was surprised that some companies help it to such a degree. I do believe that LeVine’s point is accurate when it comes to the growth of Silicon Valley. Unfortunately, because of the pandemic, it has reached a plateau, and the development has slowed down. His concerns are legitimate, but I think that Silicon Valley will come back even stronger after the lockdown. COVID-19 definitely took away so much from companies, both money and time, but I believe that it was too little time to make permanent changes in those structures that are leading the Big Tech world. The article itself is a good read and absolutely opens the reader's mind to the problem the world is facing right now.

[David Cooper]

Levine argues that “serendipity,” fueled by in-person “chance encounters,” drives the success of Big Tech companies headquartered in Silicon Valley. What evidence does he give to support this claim? How do Big Tech companies design their work environments to cultivate serendipity? According to LeVine, what three factors threaten Silicon Valley’s reliance on serendipity produced by physical proximity? Which “threats” does he focus on in his argument? Which ones might need further explanation or evidence?

In Steve Levine’s How Remote Work Could Destroy Silicon Valley, the author responds to the “reality and role of serendipity” that tech professionals have long credited with the onset of multiple billion-dollar companies and a trove of innovations. He evidences this perspective with the substantial pre-covid expenditures on designer campuses by Big Tech companies; the purpose of which were to increase those chance encounters so associated with serendipity of Silicon Valley.

It is this serendipity that’s said to have enabled a startup in Facebook to be connected via Sean Parker (of Napster fame) to Peter Thiel, its first major investor. Levine admits that “serendipity” largely occurs in networks of white/cis/men, while women and minority entrepreneurs must leverage more formal encounters. Those entrepreneurs account for less than 6% of venture capital funding!

It would seem to me that what tech professionals romantically call serendipity is actually white, male privilege; and what Levine calls chance encounters are not actually chance at all. Consider that one of the examples he refers to, the meeting of Peter Thiel (venture capitalist) and Max Levchin (of Paypal lore), could hardly be said to be chance. They met at one of Thiel’s lectures at Standord University. And while, Levin describes Levchin as “there mostly to bask in the air conditioning and escape the sweltering summer heat,” the lecture was at Stanford University! Levchin was not even a student there, he was in town fishing for a new enterprise.

From what I can tell, these Silicon Valley’s innovations stem from a culture, more so than providence or smoothies… Not unlike social media sites themselves, people want to be where others are doing what they want to do. It’s not a mystery! Remember Myspace before the advent of Facebook? Do you remember Myspace at all?! While remote work certainly makes collaboration more difficult, don’t expect Big Tech to admit so. Regardless of its potential impact on innovation in Silicon Valley, transitioning into remote work directly benefits Big Tech’s bottom line. This is the bottom line.