Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx skills add ace3000chao/book2startup --skill fewer-people-higher-paygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ace3000chao/book2startupWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/fewer-people-higher-pay)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/fewer-people-higher-pay"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/fewer-people-higher-pay/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/fewer-people-higher-pay"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ace3000chao/book2startup/fewer-people-higher-pay.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00143 | $0.01972 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00072 | $0.00986 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00394 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00197 |
Grade A, and why
fewer-people-higher-pay scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 137 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Fewer People, Higher Pay（少人高薪）
R — 原文 (Reading)
"Hire fewer people, but pay them more. One great person equals three good people in terms of business productivity."
— Verne Harnish, Scaling Up (第4章 The Team)
翻译： 少招人，但给更高的薪水。从业务产出看，一个顶尖人才等于三个普通人才。
I — 方法论骨架 (Interpretation)
- 核心逻辑： 人才质量差异是乘数效应，而非加法。A类人才的产出约等于3个B/C类人才，但薪资溢价通常不到3倍。
- 财务收益： 更少的人数 → 更低的工资总额占比 → 更高的利润率。工资单是最大固定成本，减少人头是提升利润最直接的杠杆。
- 复杂度降低： 每增加一个人，沟通路径指数增长（n×(n-1)/2）。少人才能保持敏捷。
- 文化纯度： 小团队更容易保持核心价值观的传递，减少"免疫排异"冲突。
- 执行路径： 不是"省钱招人"，而是"花更多钱招更少人"——用高溢价过滤出真正的A类人才。
- 配套要求： 招到A类人才后，必须给予高薪酬、高自主、高挑战，避免其因无聊而离开。
A1 — 书中的应用 (Past Application)
案例 1: 六人精英队 vs. 十二人普通队
- 问题: 某公司面临增长瓶颈，管理层第一反应是扩充团队。
- 方法论的使用: Harnish建议比较两种方案：维持6人精英团队 vs. 扩张到12人的传统配置。
- 结论: 精英队的人力成本占总成本比例更低，人均产出更高。
- 结果: 选择精英模式的团队在一年内实现了更高的营收增长率，且组织决策速度明显更快。
案例 2: "A类人才不愿与B/C类共事"
- 问题: A类人才如果被安排与大量B/C类人才合作，往往会因效率被拖累、决策被拉低而产生离职念头。
- 方法论的使用: 识别并移除B/C类人才，或将其安置在不影响核心产出的岗位。
- 结论: #1去障碍因素就是"不要让A类人才和B/C类人才一起工作"。
- 结果: 团队专注度提升，项目交付质量提高。
A2 — 触发场景 (Future Trigger) ★
用户会在什么情境下需要这个 skill?
- 招聘规模决策：公司在启动新项目或面对增长压力时，团队领导在"扩张人手"和"提升现有团队"之间犹豫。
- 人力成本过高：财务报表显示工资占比过高（如>40%），CEO或CFO想要降本增效。
- 团队效率低下：明明人多，产出却少——开会是"人多嘴杂"而非"集思广益"。
- 薪酬体系设计：设计薪酬方案时，纠结于"是普调还是重金留尖子"。
- 扩张vs稳守：面对市场机会，是快速招人抢占还是保持精干等待。
语言信号 (用户的话里出现这些就应激活)
- "我们是不是应该多招点人？"
- "团队扩张后反而效率变低了"
- "工资单占比太高了，利润都被吃掉了"
- "一个人干三个人的活，太累了"
- "A类人才留不住"
与相邻 skill 的区分
- 与
hire-for-culture-fit的区别：少人高薪关注"数量+薪酬"决策，文化招聘关注"招聘标准"本身，两者结合才是完整招聘策略。 - 与
topgrading-interview的区别：序列面试解决"如何识别A类人才"，少人高薪解决"为什么要招更少人且付更多钱"。
E — 可执行步骤 (Execution)
-
诊断团队现状
- 盘点现有团队，按A/B/C分类当前成员（A=前10%产出者）
- 计算工资总额占营收比例，参照行业基准（健康<35%）
- 完成标准：获得清晰的"当前人力资源资产负债表"
-
制定少人高薪方案
- 识别可合并的岗位/职能，寻找"一个A类顶三个"的重叠区域
- 确定目标薪资溢价：高于市场P75分位，锚定A类人才
- 判停条件：若某岗位无法找到A类人才，宁可空缺或外包，不降格招B/C类
-
执行并重新校准
- 实施新的团队配置，前3个月密切跟踪人均产出变化
- 每季度回顾工资占比和员工敬业度，确保持续改善
- 完成标准：工资占比下降5%以上，且产出持平或提升
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 12d ago First seen · 137 lines · 143 tokens per session scan A 1399f26560af
fewer-people-higher-pay is a skill published in the GitHub repository ace3000chao/book2startup (80 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 143 tokens to every session and 1,972 once invoked, about $0.0007 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
belbin-team-roles
Analyzes team composition using Belbin's nine team roles across Thinking, Action, and People categories. Maps team members to roles such as Plant, Shaper, Coordinator, Implementer, and others to identify gaps, overlaps, and imbalances. Use when hiring to fill role gaps, diagnosing recurring team conflicts, auditing…
inclusive-leadership
Provides daily practices for building genuinely inclusive teams through language audits, bias interruption, equitable hiring, cross-cultural sensitivity, and systemic fairness. Use when team composition lacks diversity, when DEI initiatives face backlash, when women or underrepresented groups stall in advancement…
myers-briggs-type-indicator
Maps team cognitive diversity using the MBTI four-dichotomy personality framework: Extraversion/Introversion, Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, Judging/Perceiving. Use when diagnosing co-founder communication friction, designing cognitively diverse teams, adapting communication style for different audiences…
write-role-scorecard
Use when defining a role before hiring for it — to specify the outcomes the new person must achieve, the competencies required to achieve them, and the cultural requirements, so that interview questions target evidence of actual job performance rather than proxies like credentials or experience.
apply-merit-selection
Use when making any talent selection, promotion, or recommendation decision — to test your evaluation against the reversed-relationship check, because evaluator relationship bias systematically corrupts talent decisions even in well-intentioned evaluators, and merit discipline must be applied at the moment of…
apply-peter-principle-check
Use when designing a promotion process or deciding whether to promote someone based on strong current-role performance — explicitly test whether the skills that made them successful there are the same skills the next level requires, because promotion systems that reward current-role performance alone systematically…