One team, multiple companies. The case against the bench.
How a small senior team outproduces a staffed-up org.
Most startup studios scale by hiring. They build an in-house team of 30 operators (product managers, designers, growth marketers, finance people) and lend that team out to each portfolio company.
This is the Hexa model. It works. It's also the wrong shape for the era we are in.
What changes when agents do operator work
The reason studios needed 30 operators was that each new company needed all those functions, and you couldn't staff each one independently. Pool the operators, share them across portfolio companies, the math works.
That math depends on operator work being expensive. It isn't anymore.
A small senior team with the right infrastructure can run brand, growth, recruiting, financial modeling, and most of design across half a dozen companies without burning out, because agents handle the volume work and the team handles judgment.
What we actually need humans for
Picking which companies to build. Architecting the products. Selling the first ten enterprise deals. Talking to customers. Recruiting the next person who can do all of the above.
Everything else, the agents do.
What this means for the studio shape
Not 30 operators. A senior team of around ten, building on shared agent infrastructure. More bets at once. Less coordination overhead. The same compounding leverage that makes a 30-operator studio work, without the headcount weight.
This is the shape we think wins in the agent era: a small team, agent leverage, many independent bets.