Ask HN: Should a startup start fully-remote or in-person?
6 comments
Arguably, there is no better answer than "it depends".
Solo founder? You are by default "remote", unless you're a butts-in-seats type of manager. Two co-founders either both technical or both business? Probably remote. One technical, one business? Maybe consider colocating, depending on trust levels, communication styles, etc. Three co-founders? The "maybe" gets stronger depending on the communication overhead.
Communication style and skills: the better your team is at asynchronous written communication, the easier fully remote work will be.
Cultural diversity: Some kinds of cultural diversity require better communication skills to bridge successfully, for example guilt vs. shame cultures. This is not necessarily easier to do in person, but it may be easier to recognize a problem (empathy is generally easier f2f).
Introverts will usually work better remotely (possible exception: if they can have a private office), while extroverts may wither away or just find it harder to stay engaged without in-person contact.
Etc.
There are so many factors, and so many caveats, that it really does boil down to "it depends".
Solo founder? You are by default "remote", unless you're a butts-in-seats type of manager. Two co-founders either both technical or both business? Probably remote. One technical, one business? Maybe consider colocating, depending on trust levels, communication styles, etc. Three co-founders? The "maybe" gets stronger depending on the communication overhead.
Communication style and skills: the better your team is at asynchronous written communication, the easier fully remote work will be.
Cultural diversity: Some kinds of cultural diversity require better communication skills to bridge successfully, for example guilt vs. shame cultures. This is not necessarily easier to do in person, but it may be easier to recognize a problem (empathy is generally easier f2f).
Introverts will usually work better remotely (possible exception: if they can have a private office), while extroverts may wither away or just find it harder to stay engaged without in-person contact.
Etc.
There are so many factors, and so many caveats, that it really does boil down to "it depends".
It’s interesting that you mentioned guilt vs shame cultural background, how does this play out differently in a startup environment?
It doesn't play out any differently, startups are just a pressure cooker that turn interpersonal friction and conflict up to 11, and having different expectations and communication norms (between founders, between management and employees, etc.) is just one more thing that can throw sand in the gears. And when communication isn't face to face, there is even more opportunity for misunderstanding. Which can escalate. Fast.
Note that I'm not suggesting that you default to having a homogenous team all working from the same office (that makes some things easier but inevitably creates blind spots, and becomes self reinforcing). I am saying that you have to pay more attention to these potential sources of friction in a remote work environment, and that prioritizing communication skills will pay off.
Note that I'm not suggesting that you default to having a homogenous team all working from the same office (that makes some things easier but inevitably creates blind spots, and becomes self reinforcing). I am saying that you have to pay more attention to these potential sources of friction in a remote work environment, and that prioritizing communication skills will pay off.
It can work either way. If you and your co-founders can get in a room on a regular basis and that leads to increased productivity, great. If you and your co-founders are in different cities or countries, and the only way the startup gets launched, then do that. It depends on the circumstances of the startup and the founders.
For me, I'd go 100% remote from the start. Looking 1 year, 3 years, 5 years out, 100% remote is the future for many companies. Covid accelerated this process, and the next pandemic is inevitable. Cost of living is outrageous in most tech hubs ($2.8 million for a 60 year old 3 bedroom house in Santa Clara!) and you'll have to pay more to recruit if you don't go remote. It's better for me to build that into the DNA of the company from the start.
For me, I'd go 100% remote from the start. Looking 1 year, 3 years, 5 years out, 100% remote is the future for many companies. Covid accelerated this process, and the next pandemic is inevitable. Cost of living is outrageous in most tech hubs ($2.8 million for a 60 year old 3 bedroom house in Santa Clara!) and you'll have to pay more to recruit if you don't go remote. It's better for me to build that into the DNA of the company from the start.
agreed - it might seem invariant today but forward-looking, remote is the way to go.
It does not have to be so black and white - I'd start remote, but local to each other to get together as needed. That also lets you get an office if you grow and want one, without anyone being left out.
Remote work’s benefits to startups include hiring competitiveness — engineers increasingly prefer remote work, and more talent is available by considering remote employees. However, in-person work arguably enables more effective collaboration, spontaneous idea generation, work ethic, and creativity — items which are of top priority to startups where every bit of increased productivity and performance makes the difference between success and failure.
While I of course do not expect any conclusive decision either way, I want to open the floor to debate on this topic. What, to you, is better — building a startup remotely, or in-person?