

How One Business Guy Earned the Opportunity to Co-Found a Tech Startup - jasonshen
http://www.jasonshen.com/2012/the-story-of-how-a-business-guy-earned-the-opportunity-to-co-found-a-tech-startup/

======
dataisfun
Jason, this post sort of illustrates the unfortunate arrogance some technical
founders seem to possess. I've read so many of these holier-than-thou stories
about how business founders need to supplicate before the technical guy. It's
unhelpful.

I understand that in a technical startup, you absolutely need technical
talent. But what so many people forget is the sheer amount of technical
projects that simply go nowhere. I'd argue that quality technical and quality
business people are equally invaluable. To argue otherwise is to create
toxicity by imbuing the technical culture with a sense that they are superior
to their business co-founders.

~~~
jasonshen
Hey dataisfun - I really believe in the importance of quality business people
(after all, I'd like to think that I am one)

However, the fact of the matter is that most technical people can, over time,
"figure out the business stuff" to a far greater degree than most business
people can "figure out the technical stuff".

In Silicon Valley and tech in general, engineers are in incredible demand and
opportunities to learn how to develop entrepreneurship/business skills are
everywhere. The point of the story is to illustrate an example of what
"business guys" need to do to establish the trust and respect of someone who
is technically skilled.

Also, I have run into very few arrogant, holier-than-thou developers in my
time. Perhaps that would change my perspective to be closer to yours.

~~~
dataisfun
I get your point. But I'd argue that a shortage in technical talent doesn't
logically imply great engineers are more abundant than great sales/business
people. It's just that there are probably just more mediocre business people
than there are mediocre engineers.

At the pure idea phase, some degree of technical talent, however minor, is
huge leverage, esp. if whoever it is can prototype something to a point of
raising seed capital. At this point, incredible engineering skills aren't
needed, but some solid technical background is important. That said, the
degree to which engineering talent is required is really product dependent (as
well as space dependent--i.e., consumer v enterprise).

~~~
hkmurakami
Historically, technically minded folks have been exploited by business minded
folks far more frequently than the other way around. While the most recent
bend towards "engineer supremacy" may be objectively unhealthy, in the overall
scheme of things, I think it is a positive development that will eventually
lead us to a more balanced frame of mind than before the engineer supremacy
phase started.

(and this is coming from a business side guy)

------
majorapps
I don't know how I would feel if I pitched my side project to someone and they
then went and cold called 40 companies discussing the project without my
knowledge. This time it worked out great, but what if one of those larger
companies had decided to run with it? I realise that it's good to share your
ideas, but I would at least like to have had an input. Thoughts?

~~~
justjimmy
Exactly the point that jumped out to me as well. A random guy taking my idea
and pitching it to others without my consent. It's not about whether it'll
work out or not, it's about getting permission to do what the guy did.

If the Biz guy had said "Hey, let me run your idea through some people I know
and see if they're interested. Sounds good?" Then it'd be totally fine. (Maybe
that's what happened but over looked in the article?)

------
tkiley
I feel uncomfortable with the level of arrogance that is becoming commonplace
(and encouraged) among technical founders these days.

On the other hand, I think the underlying vetting mechanism endorsed by this
post is good. In many situations, the technical co-founder has more "hard
skills" and is expected to do more work in the first few weeks (or months) of
a startup's existence, and even if that isn't true, most technical co-founders
probably perceive it to be true. Any "business guy" who proactively hustles
before the product is ready will stand out from the crowd.

------
gergles
So the answer is "he did a ton of work for free and without authorization or
permission to speak on behalf of the company"?

Come on. I know we worship technologists and hate businesspeople here, but
that's not an answer for anybody. Business people provide value and you can
find out how much by asking them the right questions. If you don't even know
the right questions to ask, then that speaks volumes more about the relative
worth of a "business guy" to your latest social-mobile-local-cat-pic-pinning-
geofenced network.

------
mrkmcknz
I remember watching the Kevin Rose foundation interview with Dennis Crowley
and he said how they were hiring and one guy went out and got a number of
mayor deals with businesses in his area.

While this may be an awesome way to got about getting hired, some businesses
may not react well to such 'guerrilla' tactics.

Edit: Foundation interview: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijOIibM4L7I>

------
kfk
And that mentality right there is the number 1 reason why companies like
Microsoft make money with buggy software and the start ups on HN are mostly
all to do apps, productive apps, facebook apps, etc.

Nobody understands the "corporate", and yet there is a lot of money and
inefficiencies to fix there.

Just saying.

------
coryl
Can't we know the name of the startup?

~~~
antidaily
Can we assume it's a Chicago startup?

~~~
jasonshen
You can if you want to. =)

