

Ask HN: How do you make decisions between cofounders? - zaidf

Cofounder A thinks you should do something using method 1. Cofounder B thinks you should use method 2. How would you do decide?<p>I know the ideal winner would be the cofounder who just does it. And in most cases, that is how decisions are made. But this is for the exceptions(ie. "do we build this product?") where you cannot simply execute and let the results talk.<p>How do you guys handle it?<p>Appreciate your tips.
======
jacquesm
Switch positions and argue the others case as good as you can.

It will help you immensely in evaluating the relative merits of both options.

~~~
zaidf
That's an awesome idea! I do this very often for my own ideas.

------
elviejo
You choose the option that gives you the biggest return on invest per time of
the constraint. In this case your development time probably is the constraint.

ie. Sales price Raw Materials Margin Product A 1000 us 200 usd 800 Product B
2000 us 200 usd 1800

so seems like product B is a no brainer right?

But if we consider the time it takes to implement: Margin Time to Develop
Margin / hrs Product A 800 100 hrs 8 usd / hr Product B 1800 300 hrs 6 usd /
hr

So product A is in fact a better use of your time.

This analysis method is called Throughput Accounting. From a management
philosophy called: Theory of Constraints

~~~
elviejo
The one that gives you the biggest return on invest per time of the
constraint.

ie.

    
    
                Sales price    Raw Materials  Margin
      Product A   1000 us        200 usd         800
      Product B   2000 us        200 usd        1800
    

so seems like product B is a no brainer right?

But if we consider the time it takes to implement:

    
    
                Margin   Time to Develop  Margin / hrs
      Product A    800         100 hrs        8 usd / hr
      Product B   1800         300 hrs        6 usd / hr
    

So product A is in fact a better use of your time.

This analysis method is called Throughput Accounting. From a management
philosophy called: Theory of Constraints

Note: This is the same as the my previous comment just used the correct
spaces.

------
JangoSteve
You may not always be able to execute and let the results talk, but you can
always do the next best thing. If it is an external issue (e.g. adding a
feature, building a product, designing an ad, etc.), do a focus group and see
which yields more favorable results. Don't let the results make the decision
for you, but learn what you can and maybe it will lift the stalemate.

If it is an internal issue (e.g. deciding a reimbursement schedule, valuating
the company, writing the business plan, picking a bank, etc.), find a mentor
who has done it before and seriously consider all of the insight they can
provide.

------
dryicerx
Objectivity. Each of you has a reason for why you are rooting for a certain
decision's side... so list those reasons out. Just write down the the
advantages/disadvantages of each decision (hrs of dev time, complexity, return
of the final product, etc), and keep everything objective as possible by
numbers if possible.

Then do a Side by side comparison, this takes away the subjectivity and
emotional aspect of decision making, and ultimately help you make the best
decision possible.

------
timanglade
If you're really split after hours of debate, just agree to surrender the
decision to an external authority. Agreed-upon third party or coin flip.
Either will do fine.

But really, if you can't agree after a long, honest discussion, maybe the
problem isn't with that specific decision. Maybe the real issue at play is a
more radical difference of mindset or approach. Sometimes arguments are just
really a good indicator that you both need to go your separate ways, no harm
no foul.

------
mvalente
Starting a startup with 2 founders is probably the worst mistake startups
make. Voting is split 50/50 and decisions become impossible.

The team should have 3 or 5 members (not 4, its even and can also lead to
50/50). Get another founder or get a coach/advisor/friend who you both trust
and that can make a rational decision when you 2 are of different opinions.

\-- MV

~~~
jakecarpenter
I would agree that decisions with 2 people are difficult, but I don't think
they're impossible. A marriage could be considered a startup with only 2
founders, and in that case, making a decision where the equity is 50/50 is
essential to making it work. And while many of these 'startups' fail,
countless others succeed.

In marriage, as in business, honesty and the ability to take another's
perspective go a long way. Ideally, you've chosen a partner whose abilities
and insights compliment your own and decisions can be made by the one most
qualified to make them.

I would think twice about starting something with anyone who was immovable in
their opinions. (and you'd know if they were or not pretty quickly) It may not
be the first instinct of entrepreneurs, but there is a possibility that both
parties are wrong! ;)

-jc

*edited for word choice

------
launic
Write down all the pros and cons, then take each topic in discussion and try
to bring as many objective and logic arguments as possible.

Leave personal feelings and your ego aside, if you do that the other might do
the same and you might reach an agreement.

