Are big and small different?

One dilemma often encountered in the MBA internship and job search is whether to work for a large or small company. The standard advice I have heard is to work for the big company first, to learn best practices in a mature organization, and then take these skills to a small/young company second. But I think there is a counterpoint in the breadth of vision gained at a small company. For example, consider the question of staffing.

As a general manager of a small company (approx. 20 employees), I made the mistake of managing staff levels too tightly in order to minimize cost. By the time I realized the need to hire, it had become very difficult to find the time to do a quality job of the search and selection. Having lived through this experience, I can now see the exact same thing playing out in very large companies. Shell makes a conscious effort to invest in HR capacity in order to maintain high quality staffing decision. The HR folks at another large energy company are stretched too thin and are having difficulty maintaining quality in their recruitment process. This will inevitably lead to difficulty in attracting the best candidates, which can exacerbate a vicious cycle. I know from my GM experience at a small company that this is a difficult hole to climb out of even for a large company. You start to accept warm bodies rather than matching skills to roles, which will reduce the effectiveness of the whole organization.

The point: small organizations are not so different from large organizations and working for a small one can allow you to get involved in a broader range of managerial activities.