Curious what are top 3 things technical co-founders care about when joining a startup?
Also equally import, what are the top 3 things they avoid?
Thanks!
1–10 of 18 posts
Curious what are top 3 things technical co-founders care about when joining a startup?
Also equally import, what are the top 3 things they avoid?
Thanks!
In reality good business guys are rare (like good programmers), and the good ones can get money from investors and customers with the product in it's current, incomplete state (hint: it's always incomplete, the completed, idealised version will never exist)
Poor business devs sit around waiting for stuff to be built, interview 1 or 2 customers, and then say yes to all the customer requests (even illogical, ill-thought out ones) and then sit around more until the new features are implemented.
This can be solved with hard goals.
Technical founder has hard time goals of finishing X,Y,Z by this date, and business dev founder has hard goals of revenue A,B,C by these dates.
If the business dev founder is unable to reach the goals then 100% of ownership of the codebase that I just wrote (myself) is mine, and I'll go find another business dev who can sell it.
That way I'm happy to take all the risk by investing a bunch of my own time and resources into building it up front, and then if it doesn't work out, I can find another way of monetizing that effort.
This has allowed me to kick out some useless business dev's who are all talk, and get in the guys who are going to make it happen. This strategy changed my life for the better a lot.
The business dev guy who spits out an imaginary list of features (not backed with empirical data in any way) and then just sits there while I work hard building and building and building, and them claiming nothing or very little can be done until the product is finished. In reality good business guys are rare (like good programmers), and the good ones can get money from investors and customers with the product in it'…
- Do you have a right to play? (do you have experience in the field that not many people do, etc)
- Are you passionate about the problem?
If you check all 3 then you're in a good position I would say.
2. Do you know how to reach them in a cost-effective way?
3. Did you spend enough time talking to customers to know what they want / need?
Avoid:
People who blame issues on others. People who are bad with money planning. Companies who are too old to grant co-founder equity.
The business dev guy who spits out an imaginary list of features (not backed with empirical data in any way) and then just sits there while I work hard building and building and building, and them claiming nothing or very little can be done until the product is finished. In reality good business guys are rare (like good programmers), and the good ones can get money from investors and customers with the product in it'…
That's a really neat strategy for ownership! Did you write the contract that you use? Any interest in sharing it?
Basically the "legal" way is to just "buy them out" as the company isn't worth all that much and you've done most (all) the work. If the partner is someone decent, you'll arrive at a number that makes sense for both of you.
The other way is a lot more spicy: just do it and one day they will sue you. Maybe.
1. How much automata & does the founding team 'care' about technical best practices which will ultimately determine the operational cost of the systems & organization/ type of people to hire. (Do I want to work with the type of people the company is going to need to hire)
2. Do the co-founder(s) understand their market, do they have Realistic & Achievable plan, including visual 'mock ups' of any key behaviors of features, can they articulate the vision to me or will I have discretion on how to implement. I stay away from dubious social science, psychology, anything that is described as "the next xyz"
3. What is the equity structure being offered & compensation relative to the market opportunity (i.e. "how likely are we going to be an exit"). What is the market size, do we have customer #1 (and #2 .. etc.) in mind, a sales strategy, avoid a field of dreams "build it and they will come" mentality.
Fwiw, I have a horrible track record finding co-founders. I prefer odd # of person startups. I don't ever do 50/50 anymore, its always 49/51 or 49.99 and 50.01 whatever it's never 50/50 by contract. One person is 'the decider' I always offer them the 51 but that balance might flip in my favor if they don't deliver on mutually agreed achievable KPI's, sort of like side-bets, and this equity percentage can move a lot at the early stages but it keeps everybody focused. If feelings and egos are going to be bruised I'd rather find out early, if they are going to be greedy and try and screw me later I'd rather not engage at all.
2. Honesty/Transparency. If you are joining early on as a vital co-founder (e.g. mostly equity compensation), I would expect equal access to the cap table, founding documents, have a co-founder agreement, etc. If your future co-founders repeatedly hide/omit important details or tell you fishy things (e.g. % ownership doesn't matter, or they don't send a written cap table after verbally agreeing to an equity split), I would run. In any event, I highly recommend having a lawyer look over your agreements!
3. Market Understanding. Are your co-founders expert in this field? If not, have they done substantially more than "have an idea" to test the market? I would also ensure alignment on things like passion for the field and exit plans.
For someone who is not that technical, that would be a big drawback. I would say in that case that they be an adult. Even if they're in their mid-20s - they are an adult. They are confident and decisive. They're optimistic about the business. I don't know how to put it into a word, but it's all one thing.
Insofar as avoiding - nepotism for one thing. Relatives, wives etc. working for the company is not a good sign for a company on the rise. I can think of companies we all know of who have been harmed by co-founder nepotism, which has all kinds of pitfalls.
Also petulance, inability to handle stress, the desire to point fingers and blame in an unproductive way. Not wanting to deal with things - passive-aggressiveness.
Also, flightiness. Bad CEOs seem to have many projects in flight, and seem to start and cancel products with no rhyme or reason. Good CEOs are usually focused on one product (or maybe product suite). Good pivots or new products are usually due to customers throwing boatloads money at the company because they want us to do something they don't offer, we don't pivot because the CEO thinks up a new idea and wants to chase a new shiny. Lack of focus.