I loved it and helped me re-evaluate how I'm running my startup, cheers!
Things about being a founder I wish I knew years ago
31–34 of 34 posts
Re: Things about being a founder I wish I knew years ago
#32The only thing I'd consider changing on this deck is point 6 about hiring and firing. The point has validity, but I've seen more (and larger) problems caused by likable but not-quite-qualified employees than I have by unlikable but qualified employees. A good board of advisors and broad feedback can help spot this problem and offer appropriate prescriptions.
There's a lot a people around, I wouldn't settle for anyone that doesn't meet both criteria.
Re: Things about being a founder I wish I knew years ago
#33I can't agree with the "investment != success" slide. It's easy to get caught up with all the things you read in the media about Y company raising X amount. Soon, you start to use that a success metric. This can lead to a lot of tension, frustration, aggravation, and self-doubt if you never raise that round.
He's not really making any controversial claim here, he's just saying taking money isn't a guarantee of "making it". Also, you don't always have to take investments at all (which the author may or may not have been alluding to). We bootstrapped Pathwright out of an existing consulting agency.
Whilst not controversial, I think a point that needs to be made. A lot of people have their sole focus/goal on raising money. They then raise money and their next sole focus/goal is raising more money.
I think more people need to realise it's an option and a choice, not a required stepping stone.
Re: Things about being a founder I wish I knew years ago
#34The only thing I'd consider changing on this deck is point 6 about hiring and firing. The point has validity, but I've seen more (and larger) problems caused by likable but not-quite-qualified employees than I have by unlikable but qualified employees. A good board of advisors and broad feedback can help spot this problem and offer appropriate prescriptions.
There's a lot a people around, I wouldn't settle for anyone that doesn't meet both criteria.
My unproven theory is that assholes are less of a problem, because it's relatively easy to identify assholes and avoid hiring them in the first place.
Likeable B/C-players are tougher because if you lack domain expertise (and aren't getting good advice) you might not realize they're a B or C player until it's too late.