The founder/author is a woman. There appears to be confusion with pronouns in most comments here.
A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
11–20 of 62 posts
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#12Another person without domain knowledge nor technical skillset to write the software needed. Maybe the person in question does sales.
But nothing warrants death marches.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#13She sounds horrible and I hope she fails.
First, there's her focus on hours.
Our team didn’t seem driven; they all finished work each day at 5:30. I remember watching “The Social Network” and admiring the passion and intelligence of the group of young engineers. My team didn’t look like that.
She wasn't unhappy because of the bugs. She was unhappy because her team didn't look like a star team. (How many stars would put up with her attitude?) What a fucking narcissist.
Second and related, there's her use of The Social Network to get a sense of what programmers are supposed to "look" like. That's offensive on so many damn levels I can't keep track of 'em all. The kicker, though, is this:
Because I’m a non-techie boss, my engineers know that I don’t understand how much time they will need to complete a task, __a deficiency that I’m sure they sometimes exploit__ (emphasis mine) and that I find incredibly frustrating.
What. A. Fucking. Bitch.
New York is swarming with non-technical douchebags whose connections get them some seed capital and possibly enough resources and client contacts to get started, and maybe even hire a few talented but clueless engineers who'll throw long hours after a bad idea. Avoid those types. They're horrible. They aren't successes in their own sphere (if they were good in the business game, they'd be in finance or consulting) and they aren't technical either, so you can't learn fuck-all from them. A great business partner, you could learn from. The sad fact, though, is that the rock stars of the business world have zero interest in the VC-funded startup world. Tech 8+ like me can't find our equals in the VC-funded world (Damaso Effect) because Biz 8s are CEOs' proteges and portfolio managers at hedge funds.
Not everyone who isn't technical sucks, for sure. However, the business world sends its rejects to manage nerds and nowhere is that more apparent than when one reads articles like this. There are great Harvard and Stanford MBAs, but they don't seem to end up as "business co-founders". They go into private equity, hedge funds, and CEO-protege type roles in business and stay there.
Finally, if you're going to found a tech company, learn technology. Learn to code well enough to understand why software engineering is hard (so you don't become that douchebag who thinks he could do the programmers' jobs with a year of training), learn how to deal with 140+ IQ people, learn how to identify useful problems, and learn enough about software culture that you're not using a fucking movie for pointers.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#14Please don't put your engineers (or any one else in your company) on death marches.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#15"I’ve also discovered that nothing is more motivating than a high profile, non-negotiable deadline." Sweet jesus no. If you don't understand what is required do NOT sign your team up for that. That's what causes death marches. Now if you had the team already analyze the opportunity and prototype "the hard parts" then by all means go for it :)
> Within a few months, we had a team of four. Development seemed slow and our live site was littered with bugs. Our team didn’t seem driven; they all finished work each day at 5:30. I remember watching “The Social Network” and admiring the passion and intelligence of the group of young engineers. My team didn’t look like that.
I think the real lesson is she hired the wrong team. In all fairness, it's a tough thing to do seeing as she had no technical background to evaluate them. Finishing work at 5:30 is a good thing but slow development and a site "littered with bugs" is something that shouldn't happen, especially with such a small team.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#16This reads as how to run a company poorly and how to build a terrible company culture.
Some gems:
> they all finished work each day at 5:30. I remember watching “The Social Network” and admiring the passion and intelligence of the group of young engineers.
Yep, a fictional movie about the founders of a social network is definitely a good benchmark for how much your engineers should be working—not standard professional hours.
> We’ve been through three [lead designers].
Yes, blame the designers for ridiculously high turnover, where you have 3 people in the same position within a year.
> a deficiency that I’m sure they sometimes exploit
Right. Not trusting your technical employees and assuming they are trying to exploit you is a fantastic way to inspire passion and trust. In fairness, since she seems to be a pretty big fan of exploiting others, it's natural that she'd expect the same.
> they worked day and night
That is not a desirable thing, it should be considered a mistake in planning which must be avoided in the future.
All in all, it sounds like she's building a terrible company to work for. Not surprising that she's (according to Crunchbase) only raised $500k.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#17Wait, she also works for the NY Times as a columnist (according to her LinkedIn profile)? Is this a blog or an ad?
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#18She sounds horrible and I hope she fails. First, there's her focus on hours. Our team didn’t seem driven; they all finished work each day at 5:30. I remember watching “The Social Network” and admiring the passion and intelligence of the group of young engineers. My team didn’t look like that. She wasn't unhappy because of the bugs. She was unhappy because her team didn't look like a star team. (How many stars would p…
I'm definitely with you on the way she treated her team and what she expected from them... but seriously... please put your IQ back in your pants.
I don't believe in "learn to code if you want to manage technical people," but it is definitely true that if you don't have at least a basic understanding of what your team is building and how, you should have someone who does informing your decisions and filtering your input.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#19Wait, she also works for the NY Times as a columnist (according to her LinkedIn profile)? Is this a blog or an ad?
She's an NY Times columnist writing about her start up experiences. She only has one start up, so it's the one she talks about in all her blog posts.
Re: A Non-Techie Tries to Build a Tech Company
#20She sounds horrible and I hope she fails. First, there's her focus on hours. Our team didn’t seem driven; they all finished work each day at 5:30. I remember watching “The Social Network” and admiring the passion and intelligence of the group of young engineers. My team didn’t look like that. She wasn't unhappy because of the bugs. She was unhappy because her team didn't look like a star team. (How many stars would p…
I agree, she does sound absolutely horrible.
That being said, I think you're being slightly too harsh on business types in general. Yes, the vast majority are rejects who couldn't cut it in finance/consulting so ended up "doing startups."
But there are also people who are in fact excellent but get sick of the soullessness of business. They can often even be leaving a role as a CEO-protege or private equity genius to follow a passion for solving a specific problem through a startup.
Of course, as they are few and far between, it's pretty hard to find them. Especially since if they're actually competent they have the connections to immediately hire top engineers.
One thing I've found is that, surprisingly, the closer you stay to their expertise the better they're likely to be. If some Harvard MBA is starting another social network, they're likely an idiot. But if a former bond trader is working on enterprise software for bond traders, it can often be that they really did leave because they discovered an interesting problem worth solving. At the very least, it means they're bringing a lot more to the table in an enterprise startup than "business experience."