Ask HN: How to be found as a technology co-founder?
There are tons of articles on the internet about how to find a technology co-founder. I believe, there is another problem that also exists. If you have strong technology skills, but no business connections or experience, it's virtually impossible to be found as a technology co-founder, even if you've got a desire and ambitions.
Can anyone suggest an approach, what should one do in such situation?
Perhaps there is some matching service (read specialty social network), which helps to address this issue.
63 comments
I'm a technical co founder. I'm CTO and the other co founder is CEO. We've been working together for 6 years now. Before that we were aquaintaces at our last job, where we met. I'd never get into the situation I'm in now with someone I didn't know. I also wouldn't do it with my best friend. I dont have any advice to be found, except to meet people and discuss ideas and get a feel for how people are and work.
Non technical co founders, when working properly, have an enormous amount of work to do, often much harder than a technical person, even though it may never involve anything more complex than excel or a web browser.
You need to find someone who you can work with, work through problems with and trust. No small task! I suspect most people find each other by pure luck.
Non technical co founders, when working properly, have an enormous amount of work to do, often much harder than a technical person, even though it may never involve anything more complex than excel or a web browser.
You need to find someone who you can work with, work through problems with and trust. No small task! I suspect most people find each other by pure luck.
My story is incredibly similar to yours. So are my thoughts about it. The only bit I would add is this - never underestimate your work mates, even if they are doing simple jobs. Some people have extremely interesting bio and you will not find out until they throw idea at you - and this is when you might (or might not) be found.
As someone who is the "technical" co-founder of a two person founding team, I have a hard time imagine being matched with someone. My co-founder and I worked together for 7 years prior to starting our business, and the dividends from those shared experiences has paid out in our ability to not have to deal with so many issues.
As an example, my co-founder is technical, but he's the CEO and is primarily focused on sales & managing our investors. I've written every line of code of our platform since day 0. We've had tons of situations over the last 18 months, since we started this company in earnest, where we've fought and disagreed in significant ways. However, the reps we've built up in communicating with one another have allowed us to move past these issues, without sacrificing the necessary dialogue, but also not harboring resentment or frustration with one another. Starting a company is so frustrating and difficult, I have a hard time imagining a scenario where I could have done it without deeply trusting my co-founder.
All that being said, everyone is unique. You may find you're more than happy to be a technical co-founder with a stranger. But, my primary recommendation would be to find someone in your circle that you trust that you'd want to work with every day for the next decade (which probably isn't too many people).
Wish you all the best!
As an example, my co-founder is technical, but he's the CEO and is primarily focused on sales & managing our investors. I've written every line of code of our platform since day 0. We've had tons of situations over the last 18 months, since we started this company in earnest, where we've fought and disagreed in significant ways. However, the reps we've built up in communicating with one another have allowed us to move past these issues, without sacrificing the necessary dialogue, but also not harboring resentment or frustration with one another. Starting a company is so frustrating and difficult, I have a hard time imagining a scenario where I could have done it without deeply trusting my co-founder.
All that being said, everyone is unique. You may find you're more than happy to be a technical co-founder with a stranger. But, my primary recommendation would be to find someone in your circle that you trust that you'd want to work with every day for the next decade (which probably isn't too many people).
Wish you all the best!
You may not like to hear it since it's not a fast path, but the best way to find a quality cofounder is probably to work in an established startup; especially you start there early and get through its growth stages. You'll not just meet brilliant coworkers, but also ones who specifically thrive in startups; and when that company grows to a certain size, they'll itch for the small startup days again and want to start something themselves.
This path would take you a good few years before you get to cofound your own startup with partners, but it's probably one of the best paths.
This path would take you a good few years before you get to cofound your own startup with partners, but it's probably one of the best paths.
If you visit https://www.indiehackers.com/ or https://www.reddit.com/r/startups/ you'll find plenty of people desperate for a technical co-founder.
Whether it's wise to pair with such people is another topic.
Whether it's wise to pair with such people is another topic.
As a developer, I would be extremely hesitant to partner with someone unless they 1) either had deep domain experience and/or had already made sales of the concept, and 2) had worked with technical folks before.
Your suspicion is well-founded. Here are some thoughts on this topic--I wrote an entire blog post on it:
http://www.davidralbrecht.com/notes/2018/06/primus-inter-par...
http://www.davidralbrecht.com/notes/2018/06/primus-inter-par...
The other model I've seen work is primus inter pares: first among equals. Many professional services firms (law, accounting, architecture) operate this way: a group of partners with one manager/leader whose decisions are final. This model acknowledges that a group needs an identified final decision-maker, but major decisions cannot be taken without support of the broader group.
This is interesting proposal but I think the ambiguity, fast changing environment, need for making regular 'leaps of faith' in startup environment is very different than the traditional centuries old business practices of accounting, architectural firm, where 'primus inter pares' is working well.
This is interesting proposal but I think the ambiguity, fast changing environment, need for making regular 'leaps of faith' in startup environment is very different than the traditional centuries old business practices of accounting, architectural firm, where 'primus inter pares' is working well.
It's adverse selection in both directions. "non-technical" people have also been burned by charlatan or otherwise flaky technologists. Word of mouth and social connections are definitely the way to go here
I'll share my personal story - maybe it will help.
I'm a technical guy, always wanted to start my own company. 6 years ago I finally got my green card and started looking for a "business" co-founder. Months went by, nothing happened. As many commented, it's usually not a good idea to found a company with somebody who you have not known for at least a few years.
Finally I decided to just go for it and learn "sales" myself. After achieving some moderate success these business people started to knock on my door. Finally I brought a "co-founder" for less than 10% equity. It really helped long term to make sure we had a tie-breaker during disagreements.
6 years later it's a 60 person, multi-million-a-year SaaS company.
I'm a technical guy, always wanted to start my own company. 6 years ago I finally got my green card and started looking for a "business" co-founder. Months went by, nothing happened. As many commented, it's usually not a good idea to found a company with somebody who you have not known for at least a few years.
Finally I decided to just go for it and learn "sales" myself. After achieving some moderate success these business people started to knock on my door. Finally I brought a "co-founder" for less than 10% equity. It really helped long term to make sure we had a tie-breaker during disagreements.
6 years later it's a 60 person, multi-million-a-year SaaS company.
Could you elaborate a bit on how you learned sales by your self? Did you just start cold calling? I have no experience in this kind of thing what so ever and I think advice from someone with a similar background who has done it would be helpful.
I don't mean to be flippat, but what is there to learn? Certainly there are tips and tricks, and salepeople do possess unique talents. But what is so complicated about calling up potential customers and talking about how your product solves a problem you have?
I think the first step is demystifying it. If you wanted to learn a new programming language, you would just "do it": read books, read about the language, practice writing code, etc.
I think the first step is demystifying it. If you wanted to learn a new programming language, you would just "do it": read books, read about the language, practice writing code, etc.
Your phone call will be answered by a person who has no decision making authority. You will need to ask for someone else, and you will need whom to ask. You will also need to know which companies to call. The calling itself maybe not that complicated, but the prep work is arduous. And then you don’t start with “buy my software” you start with “Problem X is a real drag, don’t you wish it went away?”. A lot goes into it.
Learning a new programming language is a low-risk endeavor. Your highest cost is likely to be a book that you buy, if you decide to go that route.
Compare that to a business, where you have to pay to file paperwork that you may have to hire a lawyer to tell you that you did wrong.
You need to know how to structure an articles of incorporation in a good way for your organization, and you only know you get it wrong when it's too late.
You need to know how to raise funds in a way that own't personally bankrupt you.
You need to know how to read and understand contracts.
You need to know how to hire people in a way that doesn't expose you unduly to lawsuits.
You need to know bookkeeping well enough so that you don't need to hire someone for that right off the bat.
There are tons of things. I know that I don't even know how much I don't know, because I've only ever had a small rinky-dink business.
Compare that to a business, where you have to pay to file paperwork that you may have to hire a lawyer to tell you that you did wrong.
You need to know how to structure an articles of incorporation in a good way for your organization, and you only know you get it wrong when it's too late.
You need to know how to raise funds in a way that own't personally bankrupt you.
You need to know how to read and understand contracts.
You need to know how to hire people in a way that doesn't expose you unduly to lawsuits.
You need to know bookkeeping well enough so that you don't need to hire someone for that right off the bat.
There are tons of things. I know that I don't even know how much I don't know, because I've only ever had a small rinky-dink business.
What does any of this have to do with learning sales?
I simply sold it they way I wanted to be sold - in an honest, no BS, personalized approach, focusing on customers needs.
"How to be found" sounds super passive to me. You have to make things happen, one way or another.
Word.
You need to network.
Unfortunately, networking means talking to a lot of people not like you, and giving a lot of yourself freely, which to a maker feels like both exploitation and a water of time.
Gotta kiss 99 frogs, and suddenly, frog number 18 called a friend and said friend turns into frog 100 that's actually a match.
This is fundamentally alien to makers, and wish I had been able to learn this in my 20s or 30s, but I honestly don't know how I could have been receptive at the time. (Now I'm receptive, just not very good at it.)
Unfortunately, networking means talking to a lot of people not like you, and giving a lot of yourself freely, which to a maker feels like both exploitation and a water of time.
Gotta kiss 99 frogs, and suddenly, frog number 18 called a friend and said friend turns into frog 100 that's actually a match.
This is fundamentally alien to makers, and wish I had been able to learn this in my 20s or 30s, but I honestly don't know how I could have been receptive at the time. (Now I'm receptive, just not very good at it.)
This worked for me - sure it took three years until I met the right person; but you need to put the hours into meeting people.
There're accelerators that take in applicants pre-idea, pre-team pioneered by Entrepreneur First(https://www.joinef.com/) from the UK. The cohort size is about 100, and the founders come from diverse industries and backgrounds. It vastly increases the odds of finding a co-founder - a person who has complementary skills, is committed, and wants to start the company at the same time. Though the thought of starting a company with a stranger can be hard to fathom, you have 3 months to test out the working relationship with different people before committing.
Disclaimer: I found my co-founder from the EF program and completed the program.
Disclaimer: I found my co-founder from the EF program and completed the program.
I'm currently in the process of applying for EF and have an interview in two weeks. How would you say you've found the process and would you say it was overall a positive experience?
Overall it is positive. Be mentally prepared, the percentage that eventually make it to demo day is not high. I came to EF to look for my co-founder. The quality of the cohort is phenomenal(on paper that is), albeit most are first time founders. There are researchers, engineers and domain experts all coming from diverse industries/fields. As the cohort size is so big, there are many possibilities. They will not so gently nudge you towards forming a team with complementary strengths and great fit to the problem. The scary part - when you look at teams that present on demo day, they look like a team tailor-made for the problem. What is the probability of that happening organically in the wild? Go for it, just the friendships cultivated with the cohort of great people is worth it.
Second this. Would be good to know as I’m interested in applying as well.
The only successful technical/non-technical cofounder pair I've ever been a part of (as the technical half!) came out of a weekly meetup, and among folks in similar-stage startups I’ve heard variations on that theme (met at a conference, a meetup, a SIG, whatever) many, many times. Finding a co-founder is, in so many ways, like finding a partner — and, weirdly, you’ll probably find one the same way.
The time-tested rule of common interests and alcohol (in this case: conferences and meetups!) applies here as well.
The time-tested rule of common interests and alcohol (in this case: conferences and meetups!) applies here as well.
Why not start solo?
You can found a 1 man SaaS app... burn is halfed, and your code per day rate is about the same as a pair with a business guy.
If you find business lacking down the road, you are in a position of power to pull someone in.
You can found a 1 man SaaS app... burn is halfed, and your code per day rate is about the same as a pair with a business guy.
If you find business lacking down the road, you are in a position of power to pull someone in.
My main argument for 1 person startups would be you need someone to call you on your BS. It's incredibly easy to pretend a problem isn't a problem or a solution is a good one when it really isn't. It depends on the area of business, of course, but in my particular field, rolling solo would be very dangerous.
What field is that?
You can have mentors and friends to help with BS calling if you are willing to listen. But ultimately they will not always be right, so you risk not following a valid idea far enough.
You can have mentors and friends to help with BS calling if you are willing to listen. But ultimately they will not always be right, so you risk not following a valid idea far enough.
I could crank out a SaaS product or whatever pretty confidently, but without a marketing/sales expert I'd be spitting in the wind.
Marketing and sales can be learned. Seriously. As long as you are able to validate that people have this problem and solve it in a way that makes sense the rest can be googled. If it kicks off, you can hire people with expertise to help.
Along the way for sales you'll have to learn how to put yourself out there, which can be challenging (it was for me). But its like speaking in front of people. If you do it enough times you learn to get by.
If your a founder, regardless of whether you the "tech person" or not, you'll probably have to learn all of this anyway.
Id second the "dont do it alone" part if its a full-time startup. Its tough going and having someone to share the burden in incredibly helpful.
Along the way for sales you'll have to learn how to put yourself out there, which can be challenging (it was for me). But its like speaking in front of people. If you do it enough times you learn to get by.
If your a founder, regardless of whether you the "tech person" or not, you'll probably have to learn all of this anyway.
Id second the "dont do it alone" part if its a full-time startup. Its tough going and having someone to share the burden in incredibly helpful.
If you solve a problem well, and it is a problem worth money to people - you can throw out some links on a forum or buy $100 in adwords and get a user or two.
A good advertising or marketing guy will help you go from 100 users to 1000 users, but you shouldn't need them in most cases to get a few users and start the path. Adwords isn't rocket science.
Now obviously there are exceptions, say if you are trying to create a 2 sided marketplace it's not so easy to just slow roll your product... but I think that is a fairly low % of total products.
A good advertising or marketing guy will help you go from 100 users to 1000 users, but you shouldn't need them in most cases to get a few users and start the path. Adwords isn't rocket science.
Now obviously there are exceptions, say if you are trying to create a 2 sided marketplace it's not so easy to just slow roll your product... but I think that is a fairly low % of total products.
I don't agree. Unless you literally don't want to learn it or don't enjoy it, there are lots of business/marketting resources for technical founders.
Lots of business people don't really know what they are doing, either, and more experienced people are often willing to help!
Lots of business people don't really know what they are doing, either, and more experienced people are often willing to help!
This is such a weird attitude to have when actively trying to start a startup. Both the over confidence in your technical ability to deliver something people actually want and the self-defeated attitude.
(This post is meant to be frank and only slightly provocative...)
As a builder of a company for more than a decade (a lifestyle, not Start-Up (VC-fuelled)), the hard part about starting up is NOT the tech.
You might be a really good developer, but that definitely does not translate into being a good CTO. Most common problem is being bogged down by technical perfection and rewriting until the company dies. (I have seen that happen at least ten times with companies in my network)
A CTO is a "chief officer", i.e. his/her focus should be on the survival and growth of the company. That means choosing how to act in an environment, where there is always to little money and too little time and past decisions unfortunate to fix-up..
Add to that, that when the company grows, you need to heard cats as a lot of devs are not really good at negotiating technical matters as equals..
I must admit that for me the "no business experience" would be a dealbreaker for a CTO... Balancing the liquidity versus total cost is one of the hardest problems I have ever encountered... (and that is going to be your problem even if you get a big tank of jetfuel (VC-money), the burnrate will probably still kill you if unmanaged).
Add to that, that your business partner is going to be the most influential person in your life (even more than your spouse likely), just getting "matched" is not that easy.
A family member of mine bought 50% of a company (not IT) and the other part stayed there as CTO (he was the sole owner and CEO before). The ended up almost-hating each other but being forced to stay together for most of another decade (due to both having a lot of skin in the game). The day the sold the company was the second last day they ever talked, the day the signed the final corporate report for that year was the last...
Notice neither was a bad person, they we just badly matched (personality wise, skill wise, vision wise...) and entered something they should have stayed out of.. It didn't help that both had invested their whole livelihood in the deal..
So to recap: - to enter a co-owner/founder role, you really need to know the other person, like the other person and trust the other person as much as a family member... Otherwise you are likely doomed or unhappy for a lot of your immediate future
- being a CTO (especially as co-founder) is a vastly different that just being a dev with better salary and the final say.
- experience matters
- so does 10+ years of preparation to your "overnight success".
- business is hard, most fail...
As a builder of a company for more than a decade (a lifestyle, not Start-Up (VC-fuelled)), the hard part about starting up is NOT the tech.
You might be a really good developer, but that definitely does not translate into being a good CTO. Most common problem is being bogged down by technical perfection and rewriting until the company dies. (I have seen that happen at least ten times with companies in my network)
A CTO is a "chief officer", i.e. his/her focus should be on the survival and growth of the company. That means choosing how to act in an environment, where there is always to little money and too little time and past decisions unfortunate to fix-up..
Add to that, that when the company grows, you need to heard cats as a lot of devs are not really good at negotiating technical matters as equals..
I must admit that for me the "no business experience" would be a dealbreaker for a CTO... Balancing the liquidity versus total cost is one of the hardest problems I have ever encountered... (and that is going to be your problem even if you get a big tank of jetfuel (VC-money), the burnrate will probably still kill you if unmanaged).
Add to that, that your business partner is going to be the most influential person in your life (even more than your spouse likely), just getting "matched" is not that easy.
A family member of mine bought 50% of a company (not IT) and the other part stayed there as CTO (he was the sole owner and CEO before). The ended up almost-hating each other but being forced to stay together for most of another decade (due to both having a lot of skin in the game). The day the sold the company was the second last day they ever talked, the day the signed the final corporate report for that year was the last...
Notice neither was a bad person, they we just badly matched (personality wise, skill wise, vision wise...) and entered something they should have stayed out of.. It didn't help that both had invested their whole livelihood in the deal..
So to recap: - to enter a co-owner/founder role, you really need to know the other person, like the other person and trust the other person as much as a family member... Otherwise you are likely doomed or unhappy for a lot of your immediate future
- being a CTO (especially as co-founder) is a vastly different that just being a dev with better salary and the final say.
- experience matters
- so does 10+ years of preparation to your "overnight success".
- business is hard, most fail...
Look for well-connected or very visible people and do software things for them. Next time someone asks them about a guy who’s good with X you will be on top of their mind, provided you tell them you are good with X. Worked for me.
Become active in your local startup community. Participate in hackathons. Join Entrepreneurial Centers. Attend startup-related local activities. Participate in the STARTUPBUS! Create your own networking. Put yourself out there and let others know you are interested in opportunities.
No one has mentioned Loom ( https://loom.co ), so I’ll throw it out there. Its a freelancing platform that allows users to “pay with equity” as well as cash. Disclaimer: I haven’t tried it, just remember seeing it on Product Hunt.
First of all, there is nothing special about being a (co-)founder. The only essential difference between a founder and an employee is that the former are willing to forego solid salary and accept extra levels of work and stress in the hopes that they will make up for it down the line in a much bigger payout. For a success of a company it is important which people perform various roles, and not how they're paid for it.
Therefore, the way to be "found" as a co-founder (technical or not) is in fact all about finding the right product you are willing to be a co-founder for, rather than "just" an employee. This is crucial, because if you don't truly believe in the product it will simply not be worth the effort.
Therefore, the way to be "found" as a co-founder (technical or not) is in fact all about finding the right product you are willing to be a co-founder for, rather than "just" an employee. This is crucial, because if you don't truly believe in the product it will simply not be worth the effort.
I'm looking for a technical partner. I think there's no secret recipe, but I especially like the answers below that suggest to be methodical about finding people and assume most won't work out due to life circumstances, timing, not liking each other, and more.
I also have gotten some good traction from writing this post: https://blog.usejournal.com/im-looking-for-a-technical-partn..., maybe you want to do something similar in the inverse?
I also have gotten some good traction from writing this post: https://blog.usejournal.com/im-looking-for-a-technical-partn..., maybe you want to do something similar in the inverse?
To answer question directly: Angel.co has a few folks and I've connected with at least one person on there who I really like.
More broadly: Plenty of non-technical founders out there - I think the important thing to determine is what areas are weakest for you? Example: for me, my weakness is coding, then finance. I can do those things myself but I'm slow. Ergo I work best with hardcore engineers, I don't mind if they are a bit slow on the "soft" side of things.
Source: am a sales guy with a technical background, so the "people" side is something i have a lot of exposure to
More broadly: Plenty of non-technical founders out there - I think the important thing to determine is what areas are weakest for you? Example: for me, my weakness is coding, then finance. I can do those things myself but I'm slow. Ergo I work best with hardcore engineers, I don't mind if they are a bit slow on the "soft" side of things.
Source: am a sales guy with a technical background, so the "people" side is something i have a lot of exposure to
Assuming your username on HN is the same across social media platforms, you should make it easier for folks to contact you. i.e. do not require folks to know your email address to reach out via LinkedIn. It may be annoying to get random invites, but you never know where interesting opportunities might come from.
I am a non-technical co-founder who after a year of building product, has acidentally become a full time software engineer (as our product was horrendously complicated - not always a good thing). Now I am going back to doing biz dev and market development.
At the begining, I literally crawled, begged and did anything and everything under the sun to convince technical people to join me. The waterfall looked like this:
- Say I contacted through events/linkedin/accelerators/friend-of-friends/facebook/CS-professors about 100 people (number was definitely larger than this)
- Something like 50 even bothered replying
- Something like 20 bothered having lunch with me
- Something like 10 sat down for a second meeting to look at whatever code I already had
- 5 I had maybe a week of work done together closely, discussed the challenges and arrangements closely etc.
- It didn't work out with 4 of them for various reasons - simply didn't click in some way
- 1 eventually quit their job and saved my ass. We are all full time now though of course.
When I was presenting to technical people, I had a friend doing a PhD in CS who cant quit his PhD but wrote some serious c++ code (as our work dealt with large matrices) while I wrote a web python backend to serve the cpp code. And I had a deep background in industrial engineering and finance. So I think the 50 evaluated our work and bothered replying took a reasonable guess that my chops were "not bad".
Then 6 months later it was intern season and I did the same thing again. Then I did the same thing to get funding. Then to get customers. Getting full time staff that is proverbially "ninjas" is even harder than getting investors or customers. One is committing their lives to you and another is just a procedural budget decision. Then it follows that it should be even harder for someone to co-found something with you.
After a while I started using a CRM and a systematic funneling for everything that has a 80%+ fall off rate. Which is literally everything in a startup, from newsletter opens to fundraising to good interns.
You should do all the things adviced in this thread, then assume that if there is an 80% to 90% fall off, how many of them you should do (more accurately: NEED TO DO) on a per week basis to hit your final target. Because of the last 10% who didn't fall off, you still have to reject the 9% who you can't work with, don't like the business idea personally, don't think it is a viable idea etc. If you use an accelerator's services to shortcut the process above, remember you have to pay them 6% to 8% of your eventual company and its 50-50 whether they can perform the search service well - so its cost is approximately 3% to 4% of equity.
Good luck!
At the begining, I literally crawled, begged and did anything and everything under the sun to convince technical people to join me. The waterfall looked like this:
- Say I contacted through events/linkedin/accelerators/friend-of-friends/facebook/CS-professors about 100 people (number was definitely larger than this)
- Something like 50 even bothered replying
- Something like 20 bothered having lunch with me
- Something like 10 sat down for a second meeting to look at whatever code I already had
- 5 I had maybe a week of work done together closely, discussed the challenges and arrangements closely etc.
- It didn't work out with 4 of them for various reasons - simply didn't click in some way
- 1 eventually quit their job and saved my ass. We are all full time now though of course.
When I was presenting to technical people, I had a friend doing a PhD in CS who cant quit his PhD but wrote some serious c++ code (as our work dealt with large matrices) while I wrote a web python backend to serve the cpp code. And I had a deep background in industrial engineering and finance. So I think the 50 evaluated our work and bothered replying took a reasonable guess that my chops were "not bad".
Then 6 months later it was intern season and I did the same thing again. Then I did the same thing to get funding. Then to get customers. Getting full time staff that is proverbially "ninjas" is even harder than getting investors or customers. One is committing their lives to you and another is just a procedural budget decision. Then it follows that it should be even harder for someone to co-found something with you.
After a while I started using a CRM and a systematic funneling for everything that has a 80%+ fall off rate. Which is literally everything in a startup, from newsletter opens to fundraising to good interns.
You should do all the things adviced in this thread, then assume that if there is an 80% to 90% fall off, how many of them you should do (more accurately: NEED TO DO) on a per week basis to hit your final target. Because of the last 10% who didn't fall off, you still have to reject the 9% who you can't work with, don't like the business idea personally, don't think it is a viable idea etc. If you use an accelerator's services to shortcut the process above, remember you have to pay them 6% to 8% of your eventual company and its 50-50 whether they can perform the search service well - so its cost is approximately 3% to 4% of equity.
Good luck!
Which CRM are you using?
I was talking about it in a proverbial manner - that the search for a co-founder would have to be methodical and systematic akin to sales. It can be excel, airtable, hubspot etc.
Bummer. I've been contemplating a... connection management(?) system. Something tuned to keeping track of my connections. Linkedin lists what people think of themselves, not what I think of them.
There are meetups designed for this (finding cofounders), and in my experience, they skew heavily toward non-technical people who are looking for technical cofounder. I'm in the Palo Alto area, so it's possible YMMV.
Demonstrate strong skills and experience in building successful teams and products. Bonus points to have experience in fundraising. Hiring is hard. Let the VP E figure out the architecture and development incidentals.
Another path:
Be a sole-founder. Learn whatever "business" skills on demand. If you can learn programing, what else you can't learn?
It's more possible than ever for a sole technical person to build meaningful business from ground up.
Think in a different way: what if a "business" person can't find a technical cofounder? Can the business person pick up programming skills as fast as a technical person picks up "business" skills?
What kind of "business" skills do you need? Talking? Writing English? Marketing? Sales? It's 2018. There are tons of resources online that you can use to learn these things.
Go to www.indiehackers.com to learn some inspiring stories. Be confident.
Be a sole-founder. Learn whatever "business" skills on demand. If you can learn programing, what else you can't learn?
It's more possible than ever for a sole technical person to build meaningful business from ground up.
Think in a different way: what if a "business" person can't find a technical cofounder? Can the business person pick up programming skills as fast as a technical person picks up "business" skills?
What kind of "business" skills do you need? Talking? Writing English? Marketing? Sales? It's 2018. There are tons of resources online that you can use to learn these things.
Go to www.indiehackers.com to learn some inspiring stories. Be confident.
> What kind of "business" skills do you need?
Pre-existing connections in the entrenched industry you're trying to break into? A rolodex of "people who went on to be potential channel partners" you met while doing your Harvard MBA?
Pre-existing connections in the entrenched industry you're trying to break into? A rolodex of "people who went on to be potential channel partners" you met while doing your Harvard MBA?
>What else can't you learn.
In a time sensitive manner, people skills, learning people skills is one of the hardest things to learn.
In a time sensitive manner, people skills, learning people skills is one of the hardest things to learn.
It is easy to learn "people skills", as it is largely an experiential activity, but that takes dedication and a desire to do so. Most people who complain about not being able to learn how to deal with people are afraid to or just don't want to put themselves in the position.
> Most people who complain about not being able to learn how to deal with people are afraid to or just don't want to put themselves in the position.
I wouldn't use the word most, more like many.
But regardless, you make it sound like there is something wrong with such people for feeling insecure when in fact people exhibit insecurity in a wide variety of contexts (job interviews, heights, closed spaces, etc).
I wouldn't use the word most, more like many.
But regardless, you make it sound like there is something wrong with such people for feeling insecure when in fact people exhibit insecurity in a wide variety of contexts (job interviews, heights, closed spaces, etc).
Most insecurities can be mitigated with experience. After the first few roller coasters it becomes easier. The common defeatist cycle with "people skills" is "I don't have 'people skills' " -> "I don't want to engage in situations involving other people" -> "I don't end up learning how to deal with people" -> "I never build 'people skills'"
imho if you're involved in your startup community and work on fun side-projects, you'll either find someone or someone will find you through friends of friends.
I've just found you. Take a look at my profile if you wanna reach me.
As a founder, you don't to be found. You need to find people and solve problems.
As a founder, you don't to be found. You need to find people and solve problems.
Become a founder. If idea/product is valuable - founders will flock to you begging to become co-founder.
Real life is not a set intersection problem. You need to put yourself out there.