How many founders do successful tech companies have?
philosophically.com
How many founders do successful tech companies have?
1–10 of 23 posts
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#2> That being said, based on the initial data, if you want to give yourself the best odds of having a high-growth tech company, two founders is optimal.
I don't see how that conclusion can be drawn from this kind of data.
EDIT: It looks like the post has been edited, so this criticism is no longer relevant.
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#3> That being said, based on the initial data, if you want to give yourself the best odds of having a high-growth tech company, two founders is optimal. I don't see how that conclusion can be drawn from this kind of data. EDIT: It looks like the post has been edited, so this criticism is no longer relevant.
Same here. That data could result even if a greater percentage of one-founder companies succeeded, than two-founder companies, all else being equal.
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#4> That being said, based on the initial data, if you want to give yourself the best odds of having a high-growth tech company, two founders is optimal. I don't see how that conclusion can be drawn from this kind of data. EDIT: It looks like the post has been edited, so this criticism is no longer relevant.
More top technology companies are started by 2-person founders. If you had no other data other than what is presented, and there isn't, you would want to start a company with 2 founders. Obviously this is not taking into account how many businesses are started with different numbers of co-founders. Perhaps 50% of all people who start companies as a single founder end up on this list. We don't know that. The idea I have in my head is that it's easier to start a company with fewer co-founders, so more would be started with one than two, and two more than three and so on. In any case, the data is there for you to make your own conclusions and you don't have to take mine.
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#5> That being said, based on the initial data, if you want to give yourself the best odds of having a high-growth tech company, two founders is optimal. I don't see how that conclusion can be drawn from this kind of data. EDIT: It looks like the post has been edited, so this criticism is no longer relevant.
More top technology companies are started by 2-person founders. If you had no other data other than what is presented, and there isn't, you would want to start a company with 2 founders. Obviously this is not taking into account how many businesses are started with different numbers of co-founders. Perhaps 50% of all people who start companies as a single founder end up on this list. We don't know that. The idea I ha…
> If you had no other data other than what is presented, and there isn't, you would want to start a company with 2 founders.
Your next two sentences explain why this isn't true.
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#6The title is accurate, and that is all the data presented tells you.
The implication that this can indicate which number that gives you the highest chance of success is completely bogus. Without taking account failures (or distribution of attempted companies by founder count) you have no data whatsoever for discussing what is most likely to succeed.
Makes me ask, what is this doing on HN?
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#7Its an interesting question. I think that if you're going to have more than one person leading, they should typically be leading separate parts of the business (sales / tech).
The problem with a single individual managing responsibilities is that there are still plenty of tasks that need to be done so it becomes a question of what you can automate and what you can outsource for as cheap as possible. Basically, good delegation and management skills.
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#8The title is accurate, and that is all the data presented tells you. The implication that this can indicate which number that gives you the highest chance of success is completely bogus. Without taking account failures (or distribution of attempted companies by founder count) you have no data whatsoever for discussing what is most likely to succeed. Makes me ask, what is this doing on HN?
> Makes me ask, what is this doing on HN?
1. Collecting karma for the submitter. ("Why X is foo" followed by "why X is NOT foo" followed by "Foo is irrelevant, it's actually all about bar").
2. Promoting the guy on the other side of the link. Unfortunately Vibhu Norby is one droplet in the indistinguishable white mist that makes up the ever-expanding Svbtle Borg, so it probably isn't working all that well.
(Yes, I totally do 2. Every chance I get to link to myself, I take.)
Problems:
1. How did Deloitte define their data set? (edit: I found out, it's in the report)
2. Does fast growth == success?
3. How is a founder defined?
4. What about companies that failed?
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#9The title is accurate, and that is all the data presented tells you. The implication that this can indicate which number that gives you the highest chance of success is completely bogus. Without taking account failures (or distribution of attempted companies by founder count) you have no data whatsoever for discussing what is most likely to succeed. Makes me ask, what is this doing on HN?
> Makes me ask, what is this doing on HN? 1. Collecting karma for the submitter. ("Why X is foo" followed by "why X is NOT foo" followed by "Foo is irrelevant, it's actually all about bar"). 2. Promoting the guy on the other side of the link. Unfortunately Vibhu Norby is one droplet in the indistinguishable white mist that makes up the ever-expanding Svbtle Borg, so it probably isn't working all that well. (Yes, I to…
Actually, I thought it was interesting to know what the breakdown was amongst successful startups since I've never seen any data about it, only anecdotes. I did the research. It took several hours. I happen to have a place where I can share the research with people that might care and have something to add. Clearly, I am mistaken.
Re: How many founders do successful tech companies have?
#10> That being said, based on the initial data, if you want to give yourself the best odds of having a high-growth tech company, two founders is optimal. I don't see how that conclusion can be drawn from this kind of data. EDIT: It looks like the post has been edited, so this criticism is no longer relevant.
More top technology companies are started by 2-person founders. If you had no other data other than what is presented, and there isn't, you would want to start a company with 2 founders. Obviously this is not taking into account how many businesses are started with different numbers of co-founders. Perhaps 50% of all people who start companies as a single founder end up on this list. We don't know that. The idea I ha…
Erm, ok, let's follow that through.
I don't even need to look at the data to say that in the US most successful companies have at least one white, male founder. Does that mean that if you start a tech company and are non-white or non-male you should make sure to partner up with one to ensure success? Is it just a bias due to demographics? It it a real factor related to an intrinsic advantage of white males in making successful startups (even if it's just an external cultural factor)?
Or, is it a much more complex issue that can't and shouldn't be so easily infographed and turned into a convenient piece of folk wisdom?
Taking this data, which incidentally is extremely incomplete, and using it as a rubric on how to start your company is little more than cargo cultism.