Idea Guy Looking for Developer

I find it interesting how often this happens in the space of internet start-ups.

I have a background in biochemistry and we don't have 'idea guys' coming around saying "hey, how about curing cancer?".

I agree with the article, but one thing makes me wonder. Initially one reason that developers are hesitant is because the difficulty of the project is underestimated. Layer, the author says to do it yourself, it isn't too difficult. This seems to be a bit of a contradiction. While I understand that easy is a relative term and agree that learning to code isn't too difficult, some may take that suggestion to mean that " if I can learn how to do it, your skills can't beer worth that much." Not everyone will think that, but some will. But I guess that's another clear warning sign not to work with them.

In my experience, the most important knowledge the idea guy lacks isn't how to code, it's how to plan and structure the project so that it can actually get done given whatever constraints. In order to get this, some level of technical understanding and grokking of programming is required, and this is the main asset that learning basic programming can bring to an idea guy, even if he never gets anywhere near good enough to write production code. Idea guys without that grounding tend to be overly ambitious and extremely susceptible to scope creep, not to mention more difficult for programmers to work with. These types of problems can easily be fatal to a project.

I should add that most developers don't seem to have much of this knowledge either. It comes from a rare blend of anticipating customer needs, technical understanding, and general pragmatism. The more projects I work on, the more I come to believe that someone who fills this gap is worth ten times more than both the dude with the 'great idea' and the all star coder.

How many times is the same blog post going to get written? I feel like this is the same 1000 words I read a few days ago on the same subject.

I think a partnership can make sense if there is complimentary leverage, i.e. both parties bring something to the table that the other can leverage to their benefit + the combination of both parties creates additional leverage.

Just having the idea in most situations just isn't a lot of leverage for a developer to become interested. But if you pair an idea up with:

Idea + capital, Idea + connections, Idea + salesmanship, Idea + passion + market opportunity + timing etc..., Idea + hustle, Idea + mentorship / experience, Idea + proof of concept, initial customers etc, Idea + market knowledge with a significant edge over others, Idea + accounting / misc biz skills

or a combination of those...and then you should be able to find a developer that is able to see enough upside to work with an idea person. The default answer shouldn't need to be 'learn how to code' in most cases. My viewpoint is to not do what you're hopeless at in 99% cases. There's not a lot of leverage there - ideas like speed. It's more valuable to get better at what you're already good at. If you're stubbornly trying to learn how to code and design despite hating the process, you simply didn't exhaust other avenues that yield a more expedient route to launching whatever idea/vision you have.

I did go down the learn how to code/design/market myself route because it's fun to me and that's a form of leverage that gives a potent edge. But I really hate seeing people struggle because they suck at what they are trying to learn, don't enjoy what they are learning but yet are using such things as obstacles to be conquered that they falsely believe are necessary to succeed. Sometimes it's just an excuse not to be doing what you're good at.